[A & I plus PDF only]
COPYRIGHT: © Author(s) 2013. This work is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Copyright Copernicus GmbH 2013
Abstract
Afforestation has been proposed as a strategy to mitigate the often high greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from agricultural soils with high organic matter content. However, the carbon dioxide (CO2 ) and nitrous oxide (N2 O) fluxes after afforestation can be considerable, depending predominantly on site drainage and nutrient availability. Studies on the full GHG budget of afforested organic soils are scarce and hampered by the uncertainties associated with methodology. In this study we determined the GHG budget of a spruce-dominated forest on a drained organic soil with an agricultural history. Two different approaches for determining the net ecosystem CO2 exchange (NEE) were applied, for the year 2008, one direct (eddy covariance) and the other indirect (analyzing the different components of the GHG budget), so that uncertainties in each method could be evaluated. The annual tree production in 2008 was 8.3 ± 3.9 t C ha-1 yr-1 due to the high levels of soil nutrients, the favorable climatic conditions and the fact that the forest was probably in its phase of maximum C assimilation or shortly past it. The N2 O fluxes were determined by the closed-chamber technique and amounted to 0.9 ± 0.8 t Ceq ha-1 yr-1 . According to the direct measurements from the eddy covariance technique, the site acts as a minor GHG sink of -1.2 ± 0.8 t Ceq ha-1 yr-1 . This contrasts with the NEE estimate derived from the indirect approach which suggests that the site is a net GHG emitter of 0.6 ± 4.5 t Ceq ha-1 yr-1 . Irrespective of the approach applied, the soil CO2 effluxes counter large amounts of the C sequestration by trees. Due to accumulated uncertainties involved in the indirect approach, the direct approach is considered the more reliable tool. As the rate of C sequestration will likely decrease with forest age, the site will probably become a GHG source once again as the trees do not compensate for the soil C and N losses. Also forests in younger age stages have been shown to have lower C assimilation rates; thus, the overall GHG sink potential of this afforested nutrient-rich organic soil is probably limited to the short period of maximum C assimilation.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer