Volume 10, Issue 4 (12-2023)
Journal of Spatial Analysis Environmental Hazards 2023, 10(4): 99-112 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Rigi M R, Alie Anvari A, Zolfaghari F, Salimi K. Evaluation of soil carbon accumulation potential of Capparis decidua and Prosopis cineraria species (Case study: Keshtegan, Saravan). Journal of Spatial Analysis Environmental Hazards 2023; 10 (4) :99-112
URL: http://jsaeh.khu.ac.ir/article-1-3419-en.html
URL: http://jsaeh.khu.ac.ir/article-1-3419-en.html
1- Higher Education Complex of Saravan , rezarigi@gmail.com
2- Higher Education Complex of Saravan
2- Higher Education Complex of Saravan
Abstract: (1565 Views)
Introduction: Nowadays, climate change and global warming caused by increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide, is one of the major challenges facing sustainable development. Carbon accumulation in plant biomass and soils is the simplest and economically way to reduce levels of this atmospheric gas. No research has been done on the assessment of the potential of soil carbon deposition and accumulation in the Capparis decidua and Prosopis cineraria species.
Data and Methodology: The objective of this study was to evaluate the soil carbon accumulation in Capparis decidua and Prosopis cineraria plant species in Keshtegan of Saravan, Iran. Therefore, in order to determine the amount of carbon stored in the soil, soil sampling was done by random-systematic method. One hundered-meter transects were randomly selected in the study areas and sampling points were dug at similar intervals along the transect for sampling.Soil samples were taken from depth of 0 to 30 centimeters under the canopy of Capparis decidua and Prosopis cineraria and bare soil as control (20 samples from each area). Soil organic carbon, soil bulk density, pH, salinity and content of clay, silt and sand were recorded.
Description and Interpretation of Results: The analysis of the data showed that there is a significant difference between the investigated treatments in terms of the amount of clay, organic carbon and carbon accumulation. The average comparison results showed that there is a significant difference between the soil covered by plant species and the soil of the control area. The amount of soil carbon accumulated in the area covered by Capparis decidua (1.32 tons per hectare) was significantly higher than that in area covered by Prosopis cineraria (0.75 tons per hectare) and the control area (0.25 tons per hectare). It shows the positive effect of two plant species on the amount of soil carbon accumulation. The average amount of organic carbon in the area with the Capparis decidua, Prosopis cineraria and the control area was 0.75, 0.31 and 0.1 tons per hectare, respectively.Soil organic matter and sand percentage under the canopy of both plant species were higher than the control. In terms of other characteristics, no significant difference was observed in the three regions. According to the results, it can be stated that the presence of plant canopy can increases the amount of carbon accumulation in the soil and led to global warming mitigation.
Data and Methodology: The objective of this study was to evaluate the soil carbon accumulation in Capparis decidua and Prosopis cineraria plant species in Keshtegan of Saravan, Iran. Therefore, in order to determine the amount of carbon stored in the soil, soil sampling was done by random-systematic method. One hundered-meter transects were randomly selected in the study areas and sampling points were dug at similar intervals along the transect for sampling.Soil samples were taken from depth of 0 to 30 centimeters under the canopy of Capparis decidua and Prosopis cineraria and bare soil as control (20 samples from each area). Soil organic carbon, soil bulk density, pH, salinity and content of clay, silt and sand were recorded.
Description and Interpretation of Results: The analysis of the data showed that there is a significant difference between the investigated treatments in terms of the amount of clay, organic carbon and carbon accumulation. The average comparison results showed that there is a significant difference between the soil covered by plant species and the soil of the control area. The amount of soil carbon accumulated in the area covered by Capparis decidua (1.32 tons per hectare) was significantly higher than that in area covered by Prosopis cineraria (0.75 tons per hectare) and the control area (0.25 tons per hectare). It shows the positive effect of two plant species on the amount of soil carbon accumulation. The average amount of organic carbon in the area with the Capparis decidua, Prosopis cineraria and the control area was 0.75, 0.31 and 0.1 tons per hectare, respectively.Soil organic matter and sand percentage under the canopy of both plant species were higher than the control. In terms of other characteristics, no significant difference was observed in the three regions. According to the results, it can be stated that the presence of plant canopy can increases the amount of carbon accumulation in the soil and led to global warming mitigation.
Keywords: Carbon sequestration, Keshtegan Saravan, Capparis decidua, Prosopis cineraria, Organic matter, Soil properties.
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Special
Received: 2023/10/1 | Accepted: 2023/12/16 | Published: 2024/04/28
Received: 2023/10/1 | Accepted: 2023/12/16 | Published: 2024/04/28
References
1. احمدی، حمزه؛ غلامعلی حشمتی و حمیدرضا ناصری. 1393. پتانسیل ترسیب کربن خاک در اراضی بیابانی تحت اثر دو گونۀ تاغ و سوف (مطالعۀ موردی: آران و بیدگل). مجله مهندسی اکوسیستم بیابان، 3(5): 36-29.
2. امیراصلانی، فرشاد؛ 1383. ترسیب کربن در اراضی بیابان زایی. جنگل و مرتع، 62: 76-71.
3. بردبار، سیدکاظم؛ 1398. برآورد میزان ترسیب کربن توده‌های شاخه‌زاد بلوط ایرانی (Quercus brantii Lindl.) در کامفیروز استان فارس. حفاظت زیست بوم گیاهان، 7(15): 154-141.
4. جعفری‌سرابی، حمزه؛ بابک پیله‌ور، کامبیز ابراری واجاری و سیدمحمد واعظ موسوی. 1400. تغییرات ترسیب کربن و برخی ویژگی‌های خاک در تیپ‌های جنگلی زاگرس میانی (مطالعه موردی: جنگل‌های استان لرستان). بوم‌شناسی جنگل‌های ایران، ۹ (۱۷): 151-142.
5. روانشادی، زهرا؛ سهراب الوانی‌نژاد و ابراهیم ادهمی. 1396. تاثیر جنگل کاری با گونه های اکالیپتوس (Eucalyptus camaldulensis Dehnh.) و بادام کوهی (Amygdalus scoparia Spach.) بر ترسیب کربن و برخی از ویژگی های فیزیکی و شیمیایی خاک (مطالعه موردی: پارک جنگلی دشت مازه دهدشت). نشریه مهندسی اکوسیستم بیابان، 6(15): 24-11.
6. عبدی، نوراله؛ حسن مداح عارفی و قوام الدین زاهدی امیری. 1387. برآورد ظرفیت ترسیب کربن در گون‌زارهای استان مرکزی (مطالعه موردی منطقه مالمیر شهرستان شازند). تحقیقات مرتع و بیابان ایران، 15(2): 282-269.
7. علیزاده، میثم؛ محمد مهدوی، محمد حسن جوری، خدیجه مهدوی و بهروز ملک پور. 1392. برآورد مقدار ترسیب کربن خاک در مراتع استپی (مطالعه موردی: مراتع استپی رودشور ساوه). مرتع، 5(2): 170-163.
8. فروزه، محمدرحیم؛ غلامعلی حشمتی، غلامعباس قنبریان و سیدحمید مصباح. 1387. مقایسه توان ترسیب کربن سه گونه بوته ای گل آفتابی, سیاه گینه و درمنه دشتی در مراتع خشک ایران (مطالعه موردی: دشت گربایگان فسا). محیط شناسی، 34(46): 72-65.
9. قاسمی آقباش، فرهاد؛ شریفه حیدریان و عیسی سلگی. 1396. بررسی میزان توانایی ترسیب کربن پوشش درختی و خاک حاشیه بزرگراه در زیست بوم جنگلی زاگرس (مطالعه موردی: بزرگراه خرم آباد - اندیمشک). حفاظت زیست بوم گیاهان، ۵ (۱۱): ۱۱۵-۱۲۹.
10. قربانی، اردوان؛ مهدی معمری، معصومه عباسی، سیما لازمی زارع، مهسا بقایی، کاظم هاشمی مجد، میکاییل بدرزاده و بهنام بهرامی. 1401. بررسی تغییرات ترسیب کربن و برخی خصوصیات خاک در گرادیان ارتفاعی مراتع شمال سبلان. مدل سازی و مدیریت آب و خاک، Doi: 10.22098/MMWS.2023.12245.1218
11. کریمی، علیرضا؛ صبا باقری فام و حسین شایسته زراعتی. 1394. قابلیت تاغ در ترسیب کربن آلی خاک در تپه های شنی سبزوار. مدیریت خاک و تولید پایدار، 5(1): 200-187.
12. میرزایی، جواد؛ فرزاد صیدی، سهیل سبحان اردکانی و مسعود بازگیر. 1392. اثرات جنگل‌کاری با گونه‌های بومی و غیر بومی بر میزان ترسیب کربن خاک در مناطق خشک زاگرس (مطالعه موردی: پارک جنگلی آبگرم دهلران). تحقیقات جنگل و صنوبر ایران، 21(3): 516-506.
13. نصرتی، کاظم؛ زینب محمدی و علی اکبر نظری سامانی. 1393. تاثیر عملیات پخش سیلاب دشت ذهاب کرمانشاه بر ذخیره کربن آلی خاک. پژوهش های فرسایش محیطی، ۴ (۲): ۱۲-۲۲.
14. هاشمی، سیدهادی. 1384. طرح شناخت مناطق اکولوژیک کشور: پوشش گیاهی منطقه سراوان. انتشارات موسسه تحقیقات جنگلها و مراتع، تهران.
15. وزیریان، رویا؛ حمیدرضا عسگری، مجید اونق و چوقی بایرام کمکی. 1394. ارزیابی رابطه بین تراکم کشت آتریپلکس (Atriplex halimus) با میزان کربن ترسیب‌شده در خاک (مطالعه موردی: مراتع نیمه‌‌خشک اینچه‌برون، استان گلستان). مرتع و آبخیزداری، 68(1): 180-173.
16. Azlan, A.; E.R. Aweng, C.O. Ibrahim, and A. Noorhaidah. 2012. Carrelation between soil organic matter, total organic matter and water content with climate and depths of soil at different land use in Kelantan, Malasya. Journal of Applied Sience and Environmental Management, 16(4): 353- 358.
17. Bardbar, S.K. and S.M. Mortazavi Jahromi. 2015. Investigating the potential of carbon storage in eucalyptus (Eucalyptus camaldulensis Dehnh) and acacia (Acacia salicina Lindl) forestry in the western regions of Fars province. Journal of Research and Construction, 19(1): 95-103.
18. Black, G.R. and K.H. Hertag. 1986. Methods of Soil Analysis, part 1, Physical and Mineralogical Methods. Soil Science Society of American Publication, Part 1, pp 363-376.
19. Bouyoucos, G.J. 1962. Hydrometer method improved for making particle size analysis of soils. Agronomy Journal, 54:464-465.
20. Cannel, M.G.R. and R. Milne. 1995. Carbon pools and sequestration in forest ecosystems in Britain. Forestry. International Journal of Forest Research, 68(4): 361–378.
21. Elbasiouny, H.; H. El-Ramady, F. Elbehiry, V.D. Rajput, T. Minkina, and S. Mandzhieva. 2022. Plant nutrition under climate change and soil carbon sequestration. Sustainability,14 (2): 914. [DOI:10.3390/su14020914]
22. Foets, J.; J. Stanek-Tarkowska, A.J. Teuling, B. Van de Vijver, C.E. Wetzel, and L. Pfister. 2021. Autecology of terrestrial diatoms under anthropic disturbance and across climate zones. Ecological Indicators, 122: 107248.
23. Garten, J.R. and T. Charles. 2002. Soil carbon storage beneath recently established tree plantations in Tennessee and South Carolina United States of America. Journal of Biomass and Bioenergy, 23(2): 93-102.
24. Grunzweig, J.M.; T. Lin, E. Rotenberg, A. Schwartz, and D. Yakir. 2003. Carbon sequestration in arid-land forest. Journal of Global Change Biology, 9(5): 791- 799.
25. Hopmans, P. and S.R. Elms .2009. Changes in total carbon and nutrients in soil profiles and accumulation in biomass after a 30 year rotation of Pinus radiata on podzolized sands: Impacts of intensive harvesting on soil resources. Journal of Forest Ecology and Management, 258(10): 2183- 2193.
26. Hoyle, F.C.; J.A. Baldock, and D.V. Murphy. 2011. Soil organic carbon–role in rainfed farming systems. Rainfed farming systems. Springer Nature book, pp. 339-361.
27. Jimenez, J.; R. Lal, R.O. Russo, and H.A. Leblanc. 2008. The soil organic carbon in particle-size seperates under different regrowth forest stands of Northestern Costarica. Journal of Ecological Engineering, 34: 300- 310.
28. Lal, R. 2004. Carbon sequestration in dryland ecosystems. Environmental management, 33: 528-544.
29. Lal, R. 2010. Managing soils and ecosystems for mitigating anthropogenic carbon emissions and advancing global food security. Journal of BioScience, 60(9): 708-721.
30. Lal, R. 2021. Soil management for carbon sequestration. South African Journal of Plant and Soil, 38(3): 1-7.
31. Lemma, B.; D. B. Kleja, I. Nilsson, and M. Olsson. 2006. Soil carbon sequestration under different exotic tree species in the Southwestern Highlands of Ethiopia. Geoderma, 136: 886-898.
32. Mortenson, M. and G.E. Schuman. 2004. Carbon sequestration in rangeland interseeded with yellow flowering Alfalfa (Medicago sativa spp. Falcata). Journal of Environmental Management, 33(1): 475- 481.
33. Perez Bejarano, A.; J. Mataix-Solera, R. Zornoza, C. Guerrero, V. Arcenegui, J. Mataix-Beneyto, and S. Cano-Amat. 2010. Influence of plant species on physical, chemical and biological soil properties in a Mediterranean forest soil. European Journal of Forest Research, 129(1): 15–24.
34. Rossi, J.; A. Govaearts, B. Vos, B. Verbist, A. Vervoort, J. Poesen, B. Muys, and J. Deckers. 2009. Spatial structures of soil organic carbon in tropical forests (Case study of South eastern Tanzania). Catena, 77(1): 19-27.
35. Shi, J. and I. Gui. 2010. Soil carbon change and its affecting factors following afforestation in China. Journal of Landscape and Urban Planning, 98(2): 75-85.
36. Stockmann, U.; M.A. Adams, J.W. Crawford, D.J. Field, N. Henakaarchchi, and M. Jenkins. 2013. The knowns, known unknowns and unknowns of sequestration of soil organic carbon. Journal of Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 164: 80–99.
37. UNDP. 2001. Carbon sequestration in the desertified ranglands of Hossein Abad, South Khorasan, through community-based management. GEF Project. Project ID: 673.
38. Walkley, A. and I. A. Black. 1934. Estimation of soil organic carbon by the chromic acid titration method. Soil Science, 37: 29-38.
39. Weil, R.R. and N.C. Brady (Eds.). 2017. The nature and properties of soils. 15th edition. Pearson, Columbus.
40. Whilliam, E. 2002. Carbon dioxide fluxes in a semiarid environment with high carbonate soils. Journal Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 116(1): 91-102.
41. Xu, X.; Z. Shi, D. Li, A. Rey, H. Ruan, J.M. Craine, and Y. Luo. 2016. Soil properties control decomposition of soil organic carbon: Results from data-assimilation analysis. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. Geoderma, 262: 235-242.
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 | This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
