바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

Carbon stocks and factors affecting their storage in dry Afromontane forests of Awi Zone, northwestern Ethiopia

Journal of Ecology and Environment / Journal of Ecology and Environment, (P)2287-8327; (E)2288-1220
2019, v.43 no.1, pp.43-60
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41610-019-0105-8
Getaneh Gebeyehu (Addis Ababa University)
Teshome Soromessa (Center for Environmental Science, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia)
Tesfaye Bekele (Ethiopian Environment and Forestry Research Institute)
Demel Teketay (Botswana University of Agriculture and Natural Resources)
  • Downloaded
  • Viewed

Abstract

Background: Tropical montane forests played an important role in the provision of ecosystem services. The intense degradation and deforestation for the need of agricultural land expansion result in a significant decline of forest cover. However, the expansion of agricultural land did not completely destruct natural forests. There remain forests inaccessible for agricultural and grazing purpose. Studies on these forests remained scant, motivating to investigate biomass and soil carbon stocks. Data of biomass and soils were collected in 80 quadrats (400m2) systematically in 5 forests. Biomass and disturbance gradients were determined using allometric equation and disturbance index, respectively. The regression modeling is employed to explore the spatial distribution of carbon stock along disturbance and environmental gradients. Correlation analysis is also employed to identify the relation between site factors and carbon stocks. Results: The result revealed that a total of 1655 individuals with a diameter of ≥ 5 cm, representing 38 species, were measured in 5 forests. The mean aboveground biomass carbon stocks (AGB CS) and soil organic carbon (SOC) stocks at 5 forests were 191.6 ± 19.7 and 149.32 ± 6.8 Mg C ha−1, respectively. The AGB CS exhibited significant (P < 0.05) positive correlation with SOC and total nitrogen (TN) stocks, reflecting that biomass seems to be a general predictor of SOCs. AGB CS between highly and least-disturbed forests was significantly different (P < 0.05). This disturbance level equates to a decrease in AGB CS of 36.8% in the highly disturbed compared with the least-disturbed forest. In all forests, dominant species sequestrated more than 58% of carbon. The AGB CS in response to elevation and disturbance index and SOC stocks in response to soil pH attained unimodal pattern. The stand structures, such as canopy cover and basal area, had significant positive relation with AGB CS. Conclusions: Study results confirmed that carbon stocks of studied forests were comparable to carbon stocks of protected forests. The biotic, edaphic, topographic, and disturbance factors played a significant variation in carbon stocks of forests. Further study should be conducted to quantify carbon stocks of herbaceous, litter, and soil microbes to account the role of the whole forest ecosystem.

keywords
Biomass carbon stock, Disturbances, Dry Afromontane forests, Environmental factors, Regression model, Soil carbon stock

Reference

1.

Aerts R, Van Overtveld K, November E, Wassie A, Abiyu A, Demissew S, Daye DD, Giday K, Haile M, TewoldeBerhan S. Conservation of the Ethiopian church forests: threats, opportunities, and implications for their management. Sci Total Environ. 2016;551:404–14.

2.

Amonette JE, Kim J, Russell CK. Enhancement of soil carbon sequestration: a catalytic approach. Am Chem Soc Div Fuel Chem. 2004;49:366.

3.

Bangroo S, Najar G, Rasool A. Effect of altitude and aspect on soil organic carbon and nitrogen stocks in the Himalayan Mawer forest range. Catena. 2017;158:63–8.

4.

Bazezew MN, Soromessa T, Bayable E. Above-and below-ground reserved carbon in Danaba community forest of Oromia region, Ethiopia: implications for CO2emission balance. Am J Environ Prot. 2015;4:75–82.

5.

Bohn FJ, Huth A. The importance of forest structure to biodiversity-productivity relationships. R Soc Open Sci. 2017;4:05–21.

6.

Chave J, Réjou-Méchain M, Búrquez A, Chidumayo E, Colgan MS, Delitti WB, Duque A, Eid T, Fearnside PM, Goodman RC. Improved allometric models to estimate the aboveground biomass of tropical trees. Glob Chang Biol. 2014;20:3177–90.

7.

Chen J, John R, Sun G, McNulty S, Noormets A, Xiao J, Turner MG, Franklin JF. Carbon fluxes and storage in forests and landscapes. In: Azevedo J.C. et al. (eds.), Forest Landsc Glob Chang: Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014. p. 139–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-0953-7_6.

8.

Chinasho A, Soromessa T, Bayable E. Carbon stock in woody plants of Humbo forest and its variation along altitudinal gradients: the case of the thumb district, Wolaita Zone, southern Ethiopia. Int J Environ Prot Policy. 2015;3:97–103.

9.

Ensslin A, Rutten G, Pommer U, Zimmermann R, Hemp A, Fischer M. Effects of elevation and land use on the biomass of trees, shrubs, and herbs at Mount Kilimanjaro. Ecosphere. 2015;6:1–15.

10.

Eshaghi RJ, Gelare V, Osman S, Hosein M. Effects of anthropogenic disturbance on plant composition, plant diversity and soil properties in oak forests, Iran. J Forest Science. 2018;64:358–70.

11.

FAO. Global Forest Resources Assessment. Main report, FAO Forest paper 163. 2010.

12.

Gautam TP, Mandal TN. Effect of disturbance on biomass, production and carbon dynamics in the moist tropical forest of eastern Nepal. Forest Ecosystems. 2016;3(1):11.

13.

Gebeyehu G, Soromessa T. Status of soil organic carbon and nitrogen stocks in Koga Watershed Area, Northwest Ethiopia. Agri Food Security. 2018;7:9.

14.

Goetz SJ, Hansen M, Houghton RA, Walker W, Laporte N, Busch J. Measurement and monitoring needs, capabilities and potential for addressing reduced emissions from deforestation and forest degradation under REDD+. Environ Res Lett. 2015;10:123001.

15.

Harris NL, Brown S, Hagen SC, Saatchi SS, Petrova S, Salas W, Hansen MC, Potapov PV, Lotsch A. Baseline map of carbon emissions from deforestation in tropical regions. Science. 2012;336:1573–6.

16.

Hoffmann U, Hoffmann T, Johnson EA, Kuhn NJ. Assessment of variability and uncertainty of soil organic carbon in a mountainous boreal forest (Canadian Rocky Mountains, Alberta). Catena. 2014;113:107–21.

17.

Hosonuma N, Herold M, De Sy V, De Fries RS, Brockhaus M, Verchot L, Angelsen A, Romijn E. An assessment of deforestation and forest degradation drivers in developing countries. Environ Res Lett. 2012;7:044009.

18.

Houghton R. Aboveground forest biomass and the global carbon balance. Glob Chang Biol. 2005;11:945–58.

19.

Hunter M, Keller M, Victoria D, Morton D. Tree height and tropical forest biomass estimation. Biogeosciences. 2013;10:8385–99.

20.

Husch B, Beers T, Kershaw JR. Forest mensuration. 4th ed. New York: Wiley; 2003.

21.

IPCC. IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories. Intergovernmental panel on climate change. 2006.

22.

Jackson RB, Schenk H, Jobbagy E, Canadell J, Colello G, Dickinson R, Field C, Friedlingstein P, Heimann M, Hibbard K. Belowground consequences of vegetation change and their treatment in models. Ecol Appl. 2000;10:470–83.

23.

Jiménez JJ, Lorenz K, Lal R. Organic carbon and nitrogen in soil particle-size aggregates under dry tropical forests from Guanacaste, Costa Rica—implications for within-site soil organic carbon stabilization. Catena. 2011;86:178–91.

24.

Kelbessa E, Demissew S. Diversity of vascular plant taxa of the flora of Ethiopia and Eritrea. Ethiop J Biol Sci. 2014;13:37–45.

25.

Kent M. Vegetation description and data analysis: a practical approach. 2nd ed. John Wiley & Sons; 2011.

26.

Lal R. Soil carbon sequestration to mitigate climate change. Geoderma. 2004;123:1–22.

27.

Landon J. Booker agriculture international limited. Booker tropical soil manual: a handbook for soil survey and agricultural land evaluation in the tropics and subtropics. New York: Routledge; 1991.

28.

Lee J, Hopmans JW, Rolston DE, Baer SG, Six J. Determining soil carbon stock changes: simple bulk density corrections fail. Agri Ecosys Environ. 2009;134:251–6.

29.

Lemenih M, Karltun E, Olsson M. Soil organic matter dynamics after deforestation along a farm field chronosequence in southern highlands of Ethiopia. Agri Ecosys Environ. 2005;109:9–19.

30.

Lindsell JA, Klop E. Spatial and temporal variation of carbon stocks in a lowland tropical forest in West Africa. Forest Ecol Manag. 2013;289:10–7.

31.

McEwan RW, Muller RN. Spatial and temporal dynamics in canopy dominance of an old-growth central Appalachian forest. Can J For Res. 2006;36:1536–50.

32.

Mcnicol IM, Ryan CM, Dexter KG, Ball SM, Williams M. Aboveground Carbon Storage and Its Links to Stand Structure, Tree Diversity and Floristic Composition in South-Eastern Tanzania. Ecosystems. 2018; 21:740–754.

33.

Mengistu T, Teketay D, Hulten H, Yemshaw Y. The role of enclosures in the recovery of woody vegetation in degraded dryland hillsides of central and northern Ethiopia. J Arid Environ. 2005;60:259–81.

34.

Meyer V, Saatchi S, Clarck D, Keller M, Vicent G, Ferraz A, Espírito-Santo F, Oliveira MD, Kaki D, Chave J. Canopy area of large trees explains aboveground biomass variations across neotropical forest landscapes. Embrapa Acre-Artigo em periódico indexado (ALICE); 2018.

35.

Moges Y, Eshetu Z, Nune S. Ethiopian forest resources: current status and future management options in view of access to carbon finances. Ethiopian Climate Research and Networking and United Nations Development. Addis Ababa; 2010.

36.

Moser G, Leuschner C, Hertel D, Graefe S, Soethe N, Lost S. Elevation effects on the carbon budget of tropical mountain forests (S Ecuador): the role of the belowground compartment. Glob Chang Biol. 2011;17:2211–26.

37.

Nelson DW, Sommers LE. Total carbon, organic carbon, and organic matter. Methods of soil analysis part 3—chemical methods; 1996. p. 961–1010.

38.

Ngo KM, Turner BL, Muller-Landau HC, Davies SJ, Larjavaara M, bin Nik Hassan NF, Lum S. Carbon stocks in primary and secondary tropical forests in Singapore. Forest Ecol Manag. 2013;296:81–9.

39.

Norris K, Asase A, Collen B, Gockowksi J, Mason J, Phalan B, Wade A. Biodiversity in a forest-agriculture mosaic–the changing face of West African rainforests. Biol Conserv. 2010;143:2341–50.

40.

Nyakatawa EZ, Mays DA, Naka K, Bukenya JO. Carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus dynamics in a loblolly pine-goat silvopasture system in the Southeast USA. Agrof Syst. 2012;86:129–40.

41.

Ouyang S, Xiang W, Gou M, Lei P, Chen L, Deng X. Variations in soil carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus and stoichiometry along forest succession in southern China; 2018.

42.

Padmakumar B, Sreekanth N, Shanthiprabha V, Paul J, Sreedharan K, Augustine T, Jayasooryan K, Rameshan M, Mohan M, Ramasamy EV, Thomas AP. Tree biomass and carbon density estimation in the tropical dry forest of Southern Western Ghats, India; 2018.

43.

Pan Y, Birdsey RA, Fang J, Houghton R, Kauppi PE, Kurz WA, Phillips OL, Shvidenko A, Lewis SL, Canadell JG. A large and persistent carbon sink in the world’s forests. Science. 2011. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1201609.

44.

Pearson TR, Brown SL, Birdsey RA. Measurement guidelines for the sequestration of forest carbon. In: Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-18. Newtown Square: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station; 2007. p. 27–9.

45.

R Core Team. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2016. https://www.r-project.org/

46.

Réjou-Méchain M, Tanguy A, Piponiot C, Chave J, Hérault B. Biomass: an r package for estimating above-ground biomass and its uncertainty in tropical forests. Methods Ecol Evol. 2017;8:1163–7.

47.

Rubin BD, Manion PD, Faber-Langendoen D. Diameter distributions and structural sustainability in forests. Forest Ecol Manag. 2006;222:427–38.

48.

Sagar R, Raghubanshi A, Singh J. Tree species composition, dispersion and diversity along a disturbance gradient in a dry tropical forest region of India. Forest Ecol Manag. 2003;186:61–71.

49.

Sahle M. Estimating and mapping of carbon stocks based on remote sensing, GIS and ground survey in the Menagesha Suba State Forest, Ethiopia. M. Sc. Thesis. Addis Ababa: University School of Graduate Studies College of Natural Sciences School of Earth and Planetary Science Department of Earth Science; 2011.

50.

Selmants PC, Litton CM, Giardina CP, Asner GP. Ecosystem carbon storage does not vary with mean annual temperature in Hawaiian tropical montane wet forests. Glob Chang Biol. 2014;20:2927–37.

51.

Sharma CM, Baduni NP, Gairola S, Ghildiyal SK, Suyal S. Tree diversity and carbon stocks of some major forest types of Garhwal Himalaya, India. Forest Ecol Manag. 2010;260:2170–9.

52.

Sierra CA, del Valle JI, Orrego SA, Moreno FH, Harmon ME, Zapata M, Colorado GJ, Herrera MA, Lara W, Restrepo DE. Total carbon stocks in a tropical forest landscape of the Porce Region, Colombia. Forest Ecol Manag. 2007;243:299–309.

53.

Simegn TY, Soromessa T. Carbon stock variations along altitudinal and slope gradient in the forest belt of Simen Mountains National Park, Ethiopia. Am J Environ Prot. 2015;4:199–201.

54.

Simon A, Dhendup K, Rai P, Gratzer G. Soil carbon stocks along elevational gradients in Eastern Himalayan mountain forests. Geoderma Reg. 2018;12:28–38.

55.

Spracklen D, Righelato R. Tropical montane forests are a larger than expected global carbon store. Biogeosciences. 2014;11:2741–54.

56.

Srinivas K, Sundarapandian S. Biomass and carbon stocks of trees in the tropical dry forest of East Godavari region, Andhra Pradesh, India. Geology Ecol Landsc. 2018:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/24749508.2018.1522837.

57.

Tadesse T. The value of some forest ecosystem services in Ethiopia. In:Proceeding of a workshop on Ethiopian forestry at crossroads: the need for a strong institution. Forum for environment. Addis Ababa: Ethiopia Google Scholar; 2008. p. 83–98.

58.

Tanner LH, Wilckens MT, Nivison MA, Johnson KM. Biomass and soil carbon stocks in the wet montane forest, Monteverde region, Costa Rica:assessments and challenges for quantifying accumulation rates. Int J For Res. 2016. Article ID 5812043, p. 8.

59.

Teketay D, Lemenih M, Bekele T, Yemshaw Y, Feleke S, Tadesse W, Moges Y, Hunde T, Nigussie D. Forest resources and challenges of sustainable forest management and conservation in Ethiopia. In: Degraded forests in Eastern Africa: management and restoration; 2010. p. 19–63.

60.

UNFCCC, COP. Outcome of the work of the ad hoc working group on long--term cooperative action under the convention. Decision. 2010.

61.

Unger M, Leuschner C, Homeier J. Variability of indices of macronutrient availability in soils at different spatial scales along an elevation transect in tropical moist forests (NE Ecuador). Plant Soil. 2010;336:443–58.

62.

Valencia R, Condit R, Muller-Landau HC, Hernandez C, Navarrete H. Dissecting biomass dynamics in a large Amazonian forest plot. J Tropical Ecol. 2009;25:473–82.

63.

Vilanova E, Ramírez-Angulo H, Torres-Lezama A, Aymard G, Gámez L, Durán C, Hernández L, Herrera R, van der Heijden G, Phillips OL. Environmental drivers of forest structure and stem turnover across Venezuelan tropical forests. PloS One. 2018;13:e0198489.

64.

Walkley A, Black IA. An examination of the Degtjareff method for determining soil organic matter, and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Sci. 1934;37:29–38.

65.

Wassie A, Teketay D, Powell N. Church forests provide clues to restoring ecosystems in the degraded highlands of northern Ethiopia. Ecol Rest. 2005;23:131–2.

66.

Willcock S, Phillips OL, Platts PJ, Balmford A, Burgess ND, Lovett JC, Ahrends A, Bayliss J, Doggart N, Doody K. Quantifying and understanding carbon storage and sequestration within the Eastern Arc Mountains of Tanzania, a tropical biodiversity hotspot. Carbon Balance Manag. 2014;9:2.

67.

Winfree RW, Fox J, Williams NM, Reilly JR, Cariveau DP. Abundance of common species, not species richness, drives delivery of a real‐world ecosystem service. Ecology letters. 2015;18: 626–635.

68.

Yachi S, Loreau M. Does complementary resource use enhance ecosystem functioning? A model of light competition in plant communities. Ecol Lett. 2007;10:54–62.

69.

Yohannes H, Soromessa T, Argaw M. Carbon stock analysis along with an altitudinal gradient in Gedo Forest: implications for forest management and climate change mitigation. Am J Environ Prot. 2015;4:237–44.

70.

Zanne A, Lopez-Gonzalez G, Coomes D, Ilic J, Jansen S, Lewis S, Miller R, Swenson N, Wiemann M, Chave J. Global wood density database: Dryad; 2009. Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10255/dryad.235

Journal of Ecology and Environment