On a sequence of soils developed under similar vegetation, temperature, and precipitation conditions, but with variations in mineralogical properties, we use organic carbon and 14C inventories to examine mineral protection of soil organic carbon. In these soils, 14C data indicate that the creation of slow-cycling carbon can be modeled as occurring through reaction of organic ligands with Al3+ and Fe3+ cations in the upper horizons, followed by sorption to amorphous inorganic Al compounds at depth. Only one of these processes, the chelation of Al3+ and Fe3+ by organic ligands, is linked to large carbon stocks. Organic ligands stabilized by this process traverse the soil column as dissolved organic carbon (both from surface horizons and root exudates). At our moist grassland site, this chelation and transport process is very strongly correlated with the storage and long-term stabilization of soil organic carbon. Our 14C results show that the mechanisms of organic carbon transport and storage at this site follow a classic model previously believed to only be significant in a single soil order (Spodosols), and closely related to the presence of forests. The presence of this process in the grassland Alfisol, Inceptisol, and Mollisol soils of this chronosequence suggests that this process is a more significant control on organic carbon storage than previously thought.

Primary and secondary standards are essential in radiocarbon analyses for the purpose of reporting and comparing data among laboratories, as well as for internal laboratory data quality control. ANU sucrose is one of the IAEA-certified 14C standards (C-6) with a consensus value of 1.5061 ± 0.0011 fraction modern (Fm). All of our measurements of ANU sucrose (n = 351) as a secondary standard over the last 7 yr result in an average value of 1.5016 ± 0.0005 Fm (2-σ standard error). After applying the same outlier tests used for IAEA reference standards, a weighted average value of 1.5016 ± 0.0002 Fm (n = 294) was calculated. This value is significantly lower than the IAEA C-6 consensus value (t test with unequal variance; p = 0.023). In contrast, our measurements of other secondary standards over the same time period are in excellent agreement with their respective consensus values. Since ANU is the only secondary standard measured in our lab that does not agree with the consensus values, and we have measured a larger number analyses compared to what went into the definition of the consensus value, we suggest that the consensus value of ANU sucrose might be too high by ~0.0045 ± 0.0011 Fm. Given that some labs routinely use ANU sucrose as a primary standard, our results suggest that revisiting the consensus value of ANU sucrose may be necessary.