Farmers are increasingly interested in regenerating soil health after centuries of soil-degrading practices. However, the most effective soil health regenerating practices (SHRP) and underlying mechanisms that regenerate soil health remain unclear. Our objectives were to determine: (i) how agriculture management, hillslope position, and their interactions affect soil health and root characteristics, and (ii) if there is a relationship between management-induced root characteristics and observed improvements in soil health. Soil and plant root samples were collected from 0 to 120-cm from three management practices: conventional maize-soybean rotation (Row Crop), cattle-grazed pasture (Pasture), and restored grassland (Grassland). Soil health indicators (SHIs) that are responsive to management differences: soil organic carbon, potentially mineralizable carbon, permanganate oxidizable carbon, beta-glucosidase activity, total nitrogen, and autoclaved citrate extractable protein were measured, along with root mass, root mean diameter (RMD), and root length density (RLD). Overall SHIs for Pasture and Grassland increased by an average of 54

Greater awareness of the role of soil management in achieving global production goals and mitigating emerging environmental challenges has focused the spotlight on soil health assessment and interpretation. The role of site-specific characteristics in soil health assessment has long been recognized through small-scale experimental studies, and the soil health assessment protocol and evaluation (SHAPE) tool was developed to facilitate cross-site comparisons and provide regionally relevant interpretation by accounting for site-specific factors. Specifically, SHAPE version 1.0 was developed to account for primary climate-edaphic factors including long-term climate means (temperature and precipitation) and edaphic characteristics (soil texture and soil suborder). Version 1.0S of SHAPE further incorporates a spatially explicit, heteroskedastic approach into the Bayesian linear regression model to refine peer-group scoring curves and benchmark values based on proximity. This approach captures regional variability in soil characteristics and improves the relevance and interpretability of the SHAPE scores and benchmark values.

The soil health concept has evolved over the past several decades, recognizing that the response of dynamic soil properties to management is dependent on site-specific factors. The Soil Health Assessment Protocol and Evaluation (SHAPE) tool provides scores and benchmark values by forming soil peer groups based on site-specific, climate-edaphic characteristics. Data for model development were compiled from the Cornell Soil Health Laboratory and the Kellogg Soil Survey Laboratory databases. The SHAPEv1.0 interpretation curves produce scores between 0% and 100% for measured laboratory values that reflect the quantile within a population conditional cumulative distribution function along with measures of uncertainty. The original SHAPE tool was developed for soil organic carbon and has been expanded to include two wet aggregate stability methods, permanganate oxidizable organic carbon, autoclaved citrate extractable protein, and 4-day microbial respiration. In addition, SHAPE provides site-specific benchmark values at user-defined percentiles within a given soil peer group. The difference between the actual measured value and the selected benchmark value represents the soil health opportunity gap. Case studies in Missouri and Texas show that the SHAPE scoring curves are sensitive to land-use and management practices across multiple soil types and provide a regionally relevant interpretation of key soil health indicators. Climate and edaphic factors are relevant to soil health data interpretation. Soil health assessment protocol and evaluation (SHAPE) provides site-specific soil health scores and benchmarks. SHAPE accounts for inherent factors affecting soil health indicators. SHAPE scoring curves are sensitive to land management practices. SHAPE is a useful tool for landowner soil health assessments and interpretations.

Cellulosic bioenergy feedstocks are needed to improve carbon (C) management while provisioning biomass for bioproducts and biofuel. The transition to increased cellulosic biomass production can be guided by land management plans designed to improve economic, environmental, and ecological performance. We constructed a sustainability model to compare landscape designs for biofuel production from corn (Zea mays L.) stover and switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.) in central Iowa, USA. We used the model to compare environmental and socioeconomic outcomes associated with four landscape management strategies, with and without cellulosic biomass markets. We evaluated (1) a fuelshed area containing over 1.2 million ha (3 million acres) of corn and soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merr.) within 80 km (50 miles) of a commercial-scale cellulosic biorefinery in Nevada, Iowa, and (2) the South Fork watershed containing over 72,000 ha (178,000 acres) of these row crops within eight north central Iowa HUC-12 (hydrologic unit code) watersheds. At both landscape scales, we found that it is possible to achieve multiple environmental and socioeconomic benefits concomitantly with cellulosic biomass production by strategically collecting corn stover and converting the 10% of the lowest-profitability row crop land to perennial switchgrass. Potential benefits from landscape design include increased biodiversity, soil and water quality improvements, increased soil carbon sequestration for climate change mitigation, and reduced fertilizer use and cost. Our model results showed that increasing benefits can accrue when complementary conservation practices (e.g., reduced tillage, use of a rye cover crop) are combined and integrated throughout a fuelshed or watershed area. We conclude that ecologically based landscape designs offer valuable insights about costs and benefits of land management alternatives, with relevance for achieving stakeholder goals.

Cover crops (CCs) can reduce nitrogen (N) loss to subsurface drainage and can be reimagined as bioenergy crops for renewable natural gas production and carbon (C) benefits (fossil fuel substitution and C storage). Little information is available on the large-scale adoption of winter rye for these purposes. To investigate the impacts in the North Central US, we used the Root Zone Water Quality Model to simulate corn-soybean rotations with and without winter rye across 40 sites. The simulations were interpolated across a five-state area (IA, IL, IN, MN, and OH) with counties in the Mississippi River basin, which consists of ∼8 million ha with potential for rye CCs on artificially drained corn-soybean fields (more than 63 million ha total). Harvesting fertilized rye CCs before soybean planting in this area can reduce N loads to the Gulf of Mexico by 27% relative to no CCs, and provide 18 million Mg yr ^−1 of biomass-equivalent to 0.21 EJ yr ^−1 of biogas energy content or 3.5 times the 2022 US cellulosic biofuel production. Capturing the CO _2 in biogas from digesting rye in the region and sequestering it in underground geologic reservoirs could mitigate 7.5 million Mg CO _2 yr ^−1 . Nine clusters of counties (hotspots) were identified as an example of implementing rye as an energy CC on an industrial scale where 400 Gg yr ^−1 of rye could be sourced within a 121 km radius. Hotspots consisted of roughly 20% of the region’s area and could provide ∼50% of both the N loss reduction and rye biomass. These results suggest that large-scale energy CC adoption would substantially contribute to the goals of reducing N loads to the Gulf of Mexico, increasing bioenergy production, and providing C benefits.

Soil tilth describes the friability and physical quality of a soil for crop growth. Soil tilth is an old concept yet its direct quantification remains difficult. Tilth is characterized by measuring soil properties related to soil aggregates, pore structure, mechanical resistance and organic matter, or in the field using methods such as visual evaluation of soil structure. Soil tilth is positively influenced by management that increase soil organic matter content, and negatively influenced by soil compaction. Tillage to produce tilth can have positive or negative effects over time, the latter prompting shifts to reduced or no tillage.

Corn (Zea mays L.) stover is an abundant biomass source with multiple end-uses including cellulosic biofuel production. However, stover removal may increase soil compaction by reducing organic matter inputs and increasing vehicle loads during harvest. While numerous studies have reported stover removal impacts on soil physical quality, few have assessed the role played by traffic compaction. Our objective was to quantify subsurface soil compaction after 13 years of chisel plow versus no-till management and no, moderate (3.5 +/- 1.1 Mg ha(-1) year(-1)), or high (5.0 +/- 1.7 Mg ha(-1) year(-1)) stover harvest rates. Penetration resistance was measured in most- and least-trafficked interrow spaces. Chisel plowed plots with moderate and high levels of stover removal had higher penetration resistance in trafficked areas relative to least-trafficked areas, whereas there was no evidence of traffic compaction when stover was retained. Traffic compaction did not negatively impact yields, which were greater with high levels of stover removal compared to no removal. The no-till practice led to very small increases in penetration resistance with wheel traffic and had no evidence of increased compaction with residue removal. This lack of traffic compaction indicated soils under no-till practice have a higher load-bearing capacity than soils under chisel plow practice. Overall, there were no yield-limiting effects of tillage practice or stover removal, and no evidence of soil compaction below the plow layer, suggesting stover removal with both tillage practices can be effectively employed without detrimental effects on plant or soil health.

Abstract Double-cropping winter rye cover crops (CC) with soybean in the North Central US could help with the global effort to sustainably intensify agriculture. Studies addressing the management of these systems are limited. Therefore, a field study was conducted from 2017 to 2019 in Central Iowa, US to evaluate winter rye CC biomass production, aboveground N accumulation, estimated economics, estimated within-field energy balance and estimated greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions under three N application rates (0, 60, 120 kg N ha−1) and three planting methods (pre- and post-harvest broadcast and post-harvest drilling). Averaged over N rates, all planting methods resulted in >5.0 Mg ha−1 year−1 rye aboveground biomass dry matter. Averaged over the 2-year study and compared with unfertilized treatments, applying 60 kg N ha−1 produced 1.1 Mg ha−1 more aboveground biomass (6.1 vs 5.0 Mg ha−1), accumulated 30 kg ha−1 more N in aboveground biomass (88 vs 58 kg N ha−1), and led to 20 GJ ha−1 more net energy. Biomass production was not significantly higher with 120 kg N ha−1 compared with the 60 kg N ha−1 rate. Even when accounting for an estimated 0.75 Mg ha−1 of above ground rye biomass left in the field after harvesting, more N was removed than applied at the 60 kg N ha−1 rate. The minimum rye prices over the 2-year study needed for double-cropping winter rye CC to be profitable (breakeven prices) averaged $117 and $104 Mg−1 for the 0 and 60 kg N ha−1 rates, which factors in estimated soybean yield reductions in 2019 compared with local averages but not off-site transportation. GHG emissions were estimated to increase approximately threefold between the unfertilized and 60 kg N ha−1 rates without considering bioenergy offsets. While environmental tradeoffs need further study, results suggest harvesting fertilized rye CC biomass before planting soybean is a promising practice for the North Central US to maximize total crop and net energy production.

This unique and highly effective project catalyzed collaboration among government, university, and private sector partners through a multi-state research and technology transfer project designed to support continuous improvement of bioenergy feedstock supply systems. Conceived and built upon the foundation created by prior DOE investments in the Billion Ton Study, Sun Grant Regional Project, and many other feedstock production, harvest, storage and transportation studies, this project addressed seven tasks with more than 29 subtasks. All goals were met with key accomplishments being: (1) on-farm establishment of potential perennial plant mixtures that could not only become sustainable feedstock sources but also enhance soil health, (2) a reduction in potential wind and water erosion by improving corn stover harvest techniques and incorporating cover crops into current row-crop production systems, (3) reduced potential for surface and groundwater contamination while also increasing potential biodiversity and sustainability of Midwestern USA landscapes, and (4) development of site-specific land management, data visualization, and sustainability assessment tools. Twenty-two Case Studies highlighting accomplishments and lessons learned through this public-private partnership investment are incorporated into this final report. On-farm and replicated field plot studies were used to provide the real-world data needed to verify baseline assumptions for extensive feedstock logistic modeling and greenhouse gas (GHG) assessments needed to develop sustainable bioenergy and bio-product industries at national and international scales.

Harvesting a winter rye energy cover crop (Secale cereale L.) could help sustain growing food and energy demand, provide new revenue streams, and enhance ecosystem services without inducing land-use change. A two-year field experiment with three planting methods and three N fertilization rates (0, 60, and 120 kg N ha−1) that produced >5.0 Mg ha−1 yr−1 of biomass was evaluated for (1) fresh and anaerobically digested rye forage quality; (2) revenue potential from renewable bioenergy, carbon markets, and digestate feed protein; and (3) potential greenhouse gas (GHG) offsets. We showed that rye can be harvested as forage for animals or anaerobically digested to produce renewable natural gas (RNG), with the residue after digestion (digestate) still available as a feed protein concentrate. Anaerobically digesting rye improved forage quality indicators. Digestion significantly decreased acid- and neutral-detergent fiber (ADF and NDF) by 5.2% and 17.8%, respectively, while significantly increasing crude protein (CP) (33.6%), total digestible nutrients (TDN) (2.0%), relative feed value (RFV) (23.6%), net energy for lactation (8.3%), maintenance (7.5%), and gain (20.0%). Using market prices for RNG, high protein feed, and GHG mitigation, potential on-farm revenue ranged from USD 307 Mg−1 and USD 502 Mg−1 dry matter with an average of USD 402 Mg−1. However, there are substantial costs associated with RNG and the revenue potential does not represent the profitability of this system. Evaluation of the integrated system showed GHG emissions associated with rye fertilization were more than offset by the benefits of increasing yield in the 60 kg N ha−1 treatment. The overall carbon footprint of the integrated system was strongly carbon negative, confirming the potential of this strategy to sustainably intensify land use in the Midwestern United States.

Recognition that soil resources are fragile has increased interest in soil health promoting practices (SHPPs) and ways to monitor changes in agricultural soil health. To enhance this effort, inexpensive and user-friendly methods are needed. Especially methods to measure biological activity, which is central to soil health but current methods are expensive and inconvenient. Our objective was to quantify biological activity by monitoring decomposition (via mass loss) of common household items [green and rooibos tea (Camellia sinensis and Aspalathus linearis), bleached cotton (Gossypium hirsutum), and birch craft sticks (Betula spp.)], and compare these results with common laboratory measurements of biological soil health (microbial biomass carbon and nitrogen, permanganate oxidizable carbon, and potentially mineralizable carbon and nitrogen). First, we compared both strategies using correlation, including with the yield of the dominant crop in the region [maize (Zea mays L.)]. Second, we evaluated their response to several long-term SHPPs: (i) biochar, (ii) winter cover crops, (iii) nitrogen fertilizer, (iv) no-tillage, (v) diversified rotation, (vi) perennial crops, (vii) crop residue addition/removal, and (viii) prairie restoration. Correlations between decomposition and laboratory measurements were poor and often negative. Maize yield positively correlated with tea decomposition but not with the laboratory indicators. Based on 'signal-to-noise' ratios, or magnitude of SHPP treatment effect compared to variability, measurements of decomposition, especially mass loss of rooibos tea (for 4 days) and bleached cotton (for 35 days), outperformed many of the laboratory indicators in detecting treatment differences. Decomposition was also easier and less expensive than laboratory methods indicating it is a simple, yet scientifically defensible, alternative for measuring soil biological health in agroecosystems.

Maize (Zea mays L.) stover can be harvested for multiple uses or left in the field to sustain soil organic carbon (SOC), cycle essential plant nutrients, and protect soil health. This 13-yr field study quantified effects of no (0 Mg ha(-1) yr(-1)), low (1.0-1.4 Mg ha(-1) yr(-1)), moderate (3.5-4.0 Mg ha(-1) yr(-1)), or high rates (4.7-5.4 Mg ha(-1) yr(-1)) of stover harvest from either continuous maize or maize-soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] rotation on grain yield, plant nutrient concentrations, and multiple soil properties at two sites in Iowa. Stover harvest increased plant macro- and micro-nutrient removal, but did not affect average grain yields of either crops. Soil inorganic carbon (IC), SOC, bulk density, pH, and cation exchange capacity (CEC) showed no significant differences due to stover harvest. Plant tissue and soil-test nutrient concentration effects were also minor and site-specific. Stover harvest significantly (p < .05) decreased exchangeable K and Ca concentrations by 8.3-23.8% and 0.3-22.5% but overall soil health indicator effects were minimal. Overall, based on crop yields, plant nutrient and soil-test concentrations, soil health indicators, and carbon sequestration estimates, maize stover harvest can be sustainable provided: (a) grain yields consistently exceed 11 Mg ha(-1), (b) stover removal does not exceed 40% of the aboveground biomass (i.e., 3.5-4.0 Mg ha(-1) yr(-1)), and (c) plant nutrients (especially K) are closely monitored.

Land management affects soil structure and many other soil properties and processes. Our objectives were to evaluate soil organic C (SOC), aggregate size distribution, aggregate-associated C, and soil structure as affected by long-term land management and slope. A chronosequence of 38 on-farm sites with low to high (5-18%) slopes was selected to evaluate 5-40 yr of management. The sites were classified as business as usual (BAU) cropland (BAU-Crop), BAU pasture (BAU-Past), newly established conservation reserve program (CRP) areas (CRP-New), and established CRP (CRP-Old). Soil samples were collected from the 0-to-5- and 5-to-15-cm depth increments and processed for soil property measurements including fractionation by wet sieving into five aggregate size classes (>2,000, 1,000-2,000, 500-1,000, 250-500, and 53-250 mu m). Within the surface 5 cm, mean weight diameter (MWD) and geometric mean diameter (GMD) were used to characterize soil structural stability. The BAU-Past and CRP-Old sites had 79% more macroaggregates (>2,000, 1,000-2,000, and 500-1,000 mu m), 123% higher MWD, 38% higher GMD, and 47% higher SOC than BAU-Crop or CRP-New sites. The 5-to-15-cm depth increment showed a similar but lower magnitude response. Aggregate-associated C was quantified using a constant soil mass that reflected aggregate size distribution to prevent overestimating C content. Lower-slope locations had more SOC, more macroaggregates, more C associated with macroaggregates, and higher GMD and MWD compared with high-slope locations across all management classifications and soil depths. The results support our hypothesis that the high-slop soils may benefits from specific management decisions than the lower-sloping soils as a function of landscape property. We recommend reestablishing grassland on sloping land that is susceptible to excessive soil erosion, although those practices will likely take a long time to restore soil structural stability and SOC content to precultivation levels.

Stakeholder diversity presents significant challenges to the community of scientists, practitioners, producers, and others who advocate making soil health the cornerstone of agricultural and environmental decision making. Pasture and range scientists affiliated with the Noble Research Institute in Ardmore, OK, often advise farmers to consider five indicators, which are summarized as “the Five C's of Soil Health”. They are color, crumbs, critters, cooperation, and cologne. Consensus on what to measure is just part of the research associated with soil health measurements. A farmer must have confidence that analyses conducted in different years or on different parts of the farm reflect real properties of the soil, and if changes in a measurement are occurring, that these really do reflect changes in soil on the farm.

Abstract The Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) has been a major factor in land transitions out of intensive row‐crop management on marginally productive lands in the central United States. While CRP can protect these more environmentally sensitive lands against erosion and potential nutrient loss, information on how CRP affects soil quality over time is limited. Using a chronosequence with 0–40 yr of CRP conversion history, we evaluated soil quality under different land use intensities (CRP, pasture, row crop) using the Soil Management Assessment Framework (SMAF). Effects of slope classes (higher [14–25%] and lower [2–14%]) and soil depth (0–120 cm) were also evaluated. Our results show that the soils were functioning at 84 and 78% of their theoretical capacity under CRP and row crop, respectively. Conversion to CRP enhanced overall soil quality by increasing soil biological, physical, and chemical attributes, but soil nutrient availability decreased due to the absence of fertilizer application. Increasing soil organic C (SOC) enhanced overall soil quality because of its impact on soil biological, physical, chemical, and nutrient conditions. Conversion to CRP will likely have greater benefits for more environmentally sensitive soils (i.e., higher slope) as demonstrated by structural equation modeling. Land use effects were also depth dependent, with more prominent effects within the 0‐to‐5‐cm than the 5‐to‐15‐cm depth increment. Overall, our methods focused on key soil quality indicators, confirmed ecological benefits of CRP conversion, and provided guidance for improved and simplified land management recommendations.

Enhancing global soil health will improve humankind's capacity to maintain or increase crop yield, achieve better yield stability, reduce purchased input costs, and enhance critical ecosystem services. In contrast to soil quality efforts during the 1990s and early 2000s, a major driver of soil health projects from 2011 to 2020 has been investment by private industry. The soil health partnership has focused on using science and data to work directly with farmers to adopt practical agricultural practices including cover crops, conservation tillage, and advanced nutrient management to improve the economic and environmental sustainability of the farm. Soil health indicator measurements, when coupled with an available assessment framework, complement soil erosion tools as they can directly and more definitively detect less advanced symptoms of soil health degradation across diverse management systems. The chapter also presents an overview on the key concepts discussed in this book.

Sugarcane straw removal is a promising strategy to increase bioenergy production in Brazil. However, if straw removal is not properly managed, it may lead to soil health degradation, thus threatening sustainability of the entire bioenergy production system. In this context, a comprehensive assessment was conducted in 12 field experiments located in central-southern Brazil, the world?s largest sugarcane-producing region, to investigate the impacts of straw removal scenarios on soil health, using the Soil Management Assessment Framework (SMAF). Two groups of experiments were arranged in this study, consisting of three (no?NR; moderate?MR; and total removal?TR) and four straw removal treatments (NR; low?LR; high?HR; and TR). Soil samples were collected (0?10 and 10-20 cm) to evaluate a selected set of soil health indicators (i.e., pH, available phosphorus, exchangeable potassium, bulk density and soil organic carbon). Indicators were individually scored and then integrated into an overall Soil Health Index (SHI) and its chemical, physical, and biological components. Datasets were analyzed by site, experiment groups and soil texture (clayey and sandy soils) and the relationships among straw removal, soil health, and sugarcane yield were also investigated. Our findings showed that soil health responses to straw removal were properly detected by SMAF scoring curves. Based on SHI, sandy and clayey soils were functioning at 41?56% and 67?86% of their full potential, respectively. Soil health degradation was mostly induced by TR and HR, while LR and MR resulted in minimal detrimental effects on a short-term basis compared with NR. However, sandy soils were more prone to soil health degradation, indicating that straw removal should be avoided on those soils. For clayey soils, decline in soil health was driven by physical degradation. Healthier soils were associated with higher sugarcane stalk yields, and physical degradation was the main driver for crop yield losses. Conclusions drawn from this study suggest that comprehensive soil health assessments by integrating chemical, physical and biological indicators are fundamental to design more sustainable straw management and bioenergy production systems in Brazil.

Corn (Zea mays L.) stover is used as a biofuel feedstock in the U.S. Selection of stover harvest rates for soils is problematic, however, because excessive stover removal may have consequences on plant available P and K concentrations. Our objective was to quantify stover harvest impacts on topsoil P and K contents in the southeastern U.S. Coastal Plain Ultisols. Five stover harvest rates (0, 25, 50, 75 and 100% by wt) were removed for five years from replicated plots. Grain and stover mass with P and K concentration data were used to calculate nutrient removal. Mehlich 1 (M1)-extractable P and K concentrations were used to monitor changes within the soils. Grain alone removed 13–15 kg ha−1 P and 15–18 kg ha−1 K each year, resulting in a cumulative removal of 70 and 85 kg ha−1 or 77 and 37% of the P and K fertilizer application, respectively. Harvesting stover increased nutrient removal such that when combined with grain removed, a cumulative total of 95% of the applied P and 126% of fertilizer K were taken away. This caused M1 P and K levels to decline significantly in the first year and even with annual fertilization to remain relatively static thereafter. For these Ultisols, we conclude that P and K fertilizer recommendations should be fine-tuned for P and K removed with grain and stover harvesting and that stover harvest of >50% by weight will significantly decrease soil test M1 P and K contents.

Chapter 2 Evolution of the Soil Health Movement Douglas L. Karlen, Douglas L. KarlenSearch for more papers by this authorMriganka De, Mriganka DeSearch for more papers by this authorMarshall D. McDaniel, Marshall D. McDanielSearch for more papers by this authorDiane E. Stott, Diane E. StottSearch for more papers by this author Douglas L. Karlen, Douglas L. KarlenSearch for more papers by this authorMriganka De, Mriganka DeSearch for more papers by this authorMarshall D. McDaniel, Marshall D. McDanielSearch for more papers by this authorDiane E. Stott, Diane E. StottSearch for more papers by this author Book Editor(s):Douglas L. Karlen, Douglas L. KarlenSearch for more papers by this authorDiane E. Stott, Diane E. StottSearch for more papers by this authorMaysoon M. Mikha, Maysoon M. MikhaSearch for more papers by this author First published: 09 July 2021 https://doi.org/10.1002/9780891189817.ch2Book Series:ASA, CSSA, and SSSA Books AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Summary Soil Health, during the second decade of the 21st Century, has become a familiar term to both rural and urban audiences. Advocates for the care and wise use of soil have been warning humankind since before the common era that soil is the foundation for everything we do or share. Soil health is built upon a solid foundation reflecting numerous agronomic and soil science publications and advancements in knowledge. Soil quality activities around the world expanded rapidly during the early 1990s, driven in part by increasing recognition of the role soils had in buffering and mitigating factors affecting environmental quality. The philosophical debates gradually waned and many soil quality proponents quietly moved forward emphasizing soil health which originally had slightly different approaches and priorities than soil quality, but overall were very similar concepts, appropriate for assessing biological production and environmental protection. Soil Health Series: Volume 1 Approaches to Soil Health Analysis RelatedInformation

Chapter 7 A Risk-Based Soil Health Approach to Management of Soil Lead Nicholas T. Basta, Nicholas T. BastaSearch for more papers by this authorAlyssa M. Zearley, Alyssa M. ZearleySearch for more papers by this authorJeffory A. Hattey, Jeffory A. HatteySearch for more papers by this authorDouglas L. Karlen, Douglas L. KarlenSearch for more papers by this author Nicholas T. Basta, Nicholas T. BastaSearch for more papers by this authorAlyssa M. Zearley, Alyssa M. ZearleySearch for more papers by this authorJeffory A. Hattey, Jeffory A. HatteySearch for more papers by this authorDouglas L. Karlen, Douglas L. KarlenSearch for more papers by this author Book Editor(s):Douglas L. Karlen, Douglas L. KarlenSearch for more papers by this authorDiane E. Stott, Diane E. StottSearch for more papers by this authorMaysoon M. Mikha, Maysoon M. MikhaSearch for more papers by this author First published: 09 July 2021 https://doi.org/10.1002/9780891189817.ch7Book Series:ASA, CSSA, and SSSA Books AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Summary Lead (Pb) is one of the most common urban legacy soil contaminants due to mining, refining and industrial processes, historical use in plumbing systems, and ubiquitous inclusion in gasoline and paint products throughout much of the 20th Century. The source of anthropogenic Pb affects location and concentration in excess of background levels. Lead levels in soil directly link soil health and human health, as exposure to Pb is associated with numerous negative health effects. Human exposure to Pb occurs in both built and urban environments. Risk-based soil screening levels are used by many regulatory agencies to assess urban soil Pb. Soil screening levels are very conservative measures, assume worse case scenarios, and are considered "one-way tests." Most soil health assessments have been associated with crop productivity, but they can also be very useful for many other land uses including remediation and for connecting soil and human health. Soil Health Series: Volume 1 Approaches to Soil Health Analysis RelatedInformation