CATENA · 2016
Effect of grazing on carbon sequestration and tree growth that is developed in a silvopastoral system under wild cherry (Prunus avium L.)
Ferreiro-Domínguez, N., Rigueiro-Rodríguez, A., Rial-Lovera, K., Romero-Franco, R., Mosquera-Losada, M.
Export
Effect of grazing on carbon sequestration and tree growth th…
Abstract
Silvopastoral systems have been considered a good tool for carbon sequestration by taking up atmospheric carbon dioxide and storing it in the soil. The effect of animal presence on carbon sequestration in this type of agroforestry system has been studied recently. However, the soil carbon storage in these systems is influenced by the stocking rate. In addition, soil fractions have been known to influence carbon storage. This study was undertaken in order to examine the effects of livestock grazing at two different stocking rates [Light Stocking Rate (LS; 4 sheep ha−1 ) and Heavy Stocking Rate (HS; 8 sheep ha−1 )]. This was compared with the soil chemical and physical properties of No Grazing (NG) pastures, the amount of C stored in the whole soil, in three different soil fractions (250–2000, 53–250, and b53 μm), at each of four soil depths (0–25, 25–50, 50–75, and 75–100 cm), and the tree growth in a silvopastoral system under Prunus avium L. The presence of animals in silvopastoral systems plays an important role in carbon sequestration by the direct or indirect modifications of the pH, the soil bulk density, and the soil fraction proportions. The LS treatment promoted carbon sequestration linked to macroaggregates in the upper soil layers when compared with the HS treatment and the NG treatment. However, in deep horizons, the NG treatment enhanced the soil organic carbon storage more than did the grazing treatments and this carbon was linked to microaggregates, increasing the soil density. A better carbon concentration was found when 1 m of soil depth was evaluated in an LS treatment, but no differences were apparent in the carbon storage per hectare that were found due to a high soil bulk density in an NG treatment.
Show all
Silvopastoral systems have been considered a good tool for carbon sequestration by taking up atmospheric carbon dioxide and storing it in the soil. The effect of animal presence on carbon sequestration in this type of agroforestry system has been studied recently. However, the soil carbon storage in these systems is influenced by the stocking rate. In addition, soil fractions have been known to influence carbon storage. This study was undertaken in order to examine the effects of livestock grazing at two different stocking rates [Light Stocking Rate (LS; 4 sheep ha−1 ) and Heavy Stocking Rate (HS; 8 sheep ha−1 )]. This was compared with the soil chemical and physical properties of No Grazing (NG) pastures, the amount of C stored in the whole soil, in three different soil fractions (250–2000, 53–250, and b53 μm), at each of four soil depths (0–25, 25–50, 50–75, and 75–100 cm), and the tree growth in a silvopastoral system under Prunus avium L. The presence of animals in silvopastoral systems plays an important role in carbon sequestration by the direct or indirect modifications of the pH, the soil bulk density, and the soil fraction proportions. The LS treatment promoted carbon sequestration linked to macroaggregates in the upper soil layers when compared with the HS treatment and the NG treatment. However, in deep horizons, the NG treatment enhanced the soil organic carbon storage more than did the grazing treatments and this carbon was linked to microaggregates, increasing the soil density. A better carbon concentration was found when 1 m of soil depth was evaluated in an LS treatment, but no differences were apparent in the carbon storage per hectare that were found due to a high soil bulk density in an NG treatment.
Silvopastoral systems have been considered a good tool for carbon sequestration by taking up atmospheric carbon dioxide and storing it in the soil. The effect of animal presence on carbon sequestration in this type of agroforestry system has been studied recently. However, the soil carbon storage in these systems is influenced by the stocking rate. In addition, soil fractions have been known to influence carbon storage. This study was undertaken in order to examine the effects of livestock grazing at two different stocking rates [Light Stocking Rate (LS; 4 sheep ha−1 ) and Heavy Stocking Rate (HS; 8 sheep ha−1 )]. This was compared with the soil chemical and physical properties of No Grazing (NG) pastures, the amount of C stored in the whole soil, in three different soil fractions (250–2000, 53–250, and b53 μm), at each of four soil depths (0–25, 25–50, 50–75, and 75–100 cm), and the tree growth in a silvopastoral system under Prunus avium L. The presence of animals in silvopastoral systems plays an important role in carbon sequestration by the direct or indirect modifications of the pH, the soil bulk density, and the soil fraction proportions. The LS treatment promoted carbon sequestration linked to macroaggregates in the upper soil layers when compared with the HS treatment and the NG treatment. However, in deep horizons, the NG treatment enhanced the soil organic carbon storage more than did the grazing treatments and this carbon was linked to microaggregates, increasing the soil density. A better carbon concentration was found when 1 m of soil depth was evaluated in an LS treatment, but no differences were apparent in the carbon storage per hectare that were found due to a high soil bulk density in an NG treatment.
Similar papers
Soil Carbon Storage in Silvopastoral Systems and a Treeless Pasture in Northwestern Spain
Howlett et al. · 2011 · Journal of Environmental Quality
3 shared concepts
2 findings2 sites
Productivity and carbon storage in silvopastoral systems with Pinus ponderosa and Trifolium spp., plantations and pasture on an Andisol in Patagonia, Chile
Dube et al. · 2012 · Agroforestry Systems
3 shared concepts
2 findings1 site
Increased soil organic carbon stocks under agroforestry: A survey of six different sites in France
Cardinael et al. · 2017 · Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment
3 shared concepts
