مقايسه ميزان ترسيب کربن خاک در کاربري¬هاي مختلف ( مطالعه موردي: حوزه شهري شهرستان بهشهر)
محورهای موضوعی : مدیریت محیط زیست
کبریا جعفری
1
(دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد، رشته محیط زیست (گرایش ارزیابی و آمایش سرزمین)، دانشگاه پیام نور، تهران، ایران.)
مرضیه علی خواه اصل
2
(استادیار، گروه کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی، دانشگاه پیام نور، تهران، ایران. *(مسوول مکاتبات))
یحیی کوچ
3
(استادیار، گروه جنگلداری، دانشکده منابع طبیعی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس نور، ایران.)
کلید واژه: کاربري اراضي, مرتع, باغي مرکبات, زراعت گندم.,
چکیده مقاله :
زمینه و هدف: افزايش غلظت گازهاي گلخانه اي در سال¬هاي اخير منجر به افزايش گرماي جهاني و تغييرات اقليمي شده است. ساده¬ترین راهکار برای کاهش سطح این گاز فرآیند ترسیب کربن است. طی این فرآیند، کربن در بخش¬هاي مختلف اکوسيستم¬ها ذخیره می¬شود که مهم¬ترین اين بخش¬ها، خاک است. هدف از اين پژوهش ارزيابي میزان ترسيب کربن خاک در کاربري¬هاي زراعت گندم، باغ مرکبات و مرتع در حوزه شهري بهشهر می¬باشد. روش بررسی: در این تحقیق، نمونه¬برداري خاک در ده نقطه در هر يک از کاربري¬ها تا عمق ۳۰سانتي¬متری با استفاده از روش تصادفي سيستماتيك انجام شد. بافت خاک، وزن مخصوص ظاهري، اسيديته، رطوبت، کربن آلي، نيتروژن در محيط آزمايشگاه اندازه¬گيري شد. برای بررسی تفاوت یا عدم تفاوت میزان ترسیب کربن و مشخصه¬های مختلف خاک در کاربری¬های مختلف، از آزمون تجزیه واریانس و برای بررسی ارتباط بین میزان ترسیب کربن با مشخصه های مختلف خاک از همبستگی پیرسون استفاده شد. یافته ها: نتایج نشان داد، به¬طور متوسط ميزان ترسيب کربن در کاربري باغ مرکبات ۵۴/۰ تن در هکتار، زراعت گندم ۳۶/۰ تن در هکتار و مرتع ۵۱/۰ تن در هکتار می¬باشد. در نتیجه بين کاربري¬های مورد بررسی، کاربری باغي در اولويت اول و کاربري¬های مرتع و زراعت گندم در اولويت¬هاي بعد قرار گرفتند. همبستگي پيرسون نیز نشان داد از بين پارامترهاي مورد بررسي، مشخصه نيتروژن بر تغيير¬پذيري ميزان ترسيب کربن خاک موثرتر بوده است. بحث و نتیجه¬گیری: بر اساس نتایج این پژوهش، کاربری¬های مختلف اثر متفاوتی بر میزان انباشتگی ترسیب کربن خاک دارد که در جهت مديريت اراضي واقع در شمال کشور مي بايست مورد توجه قرار گيرد.
Background and Objective: In recent years, increasing of greenhouse gases results in global warming and climate changes. Carbon sequestration is a result of carbon capturing in different parts of ecosystems, particularly in soil. The purpose of the present study is evaluation of carbon sequestration potential in wheat field, citrus garden and grassland in urban district of Behshahr. Material and Methodology: The soil samples were collected from ten different points for each land use. They were randomly taken from a depth of 30 cm using systematic random sampling. Texture, apparent specific density, acidity, humidity, organic carbon and nitrogen of the soil were measured in laboratoty. The analysis of variance of soil properties indicates significant difference in studied land uses regarding to carbon sequestration. Findings: The results showed that the average carbon sequestration in wheat field, citrus garden and grassland were 36% (Ton/Ha), 54% (Ton/Ha), 51%(Ton/Ha) , respectively. Totally, citrus garden had the highest carbon sequestration among studied land uses. Grassland and wheat field were ranked in second and third places, respectively. Via Pearson product-moment correlation, it was revealed that among all analyzed parameters, nitrogen had the most effect on soil carbon sequestration. Discussion and Conclusion: The results of the present study show how land use effects on soil carbon sequestration, hence considering these results is necessary for Lands Management in North of Iran.
1. Osabohien, R., Matthew, O., Aderounmu, B., and olawande, T.I. 2019. Greenhouse gas emissions and crop production in West Africa: Examining the mitigating potential of social protection. International J. of Energy Economics and Policy. 9: 1. 57-66.
2. IPCC, 2000. Land use, land use change and forestry special report, Cambridge university Press, 377Pp.
3. Alidoust,E., Afyuni,M., Hajabbasi,M.A., Mosaddeghi,M.R. 2018. Soil carbon sequestration potential as affected by soil physical and climatic factors under different land uses in a semiarid region. Catena.171: 62-71.
4. Tilahun, E., Haile, M., Gebresamuel, G., Zeleke, G. 2022. Spatial and temporal dynamics of soil organic carbon stock and carbon sequestration affected by major land-use conversions in Northwestern highlands of Ethiopia, Geoderma, Vol.406, 115506.
5. Xia, F.,Yang ,Y., Zhang, Sh., Yang, Y., Li , D., Sun, W., Xie,Y. 2022. Influencing factors of the supply-demand relationships of carbon sequestration and grain provision in China: Does land use matter the most?, Science of The Total Environment, Vol. 832, 154979.
6. Friedlingstein, P., Jones, M.W., O’Sullivan, M., Andrew, R.M., Bakker, D.C.E., 2022. Global carbon budget 2021. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 14, 1917–2005.
7. Johnston, A.E., Poulton, P.R., Coleman, K., 2009. Soil organic matter: its importance in sustainable agriculture and carbon dioxide fluxes. In: Advances in Agronomy. Elsevier Inc., pp. 1–57.
8. Riggers, C., Poeplau, C., Don, A., Frühauf, C., Dechow, R., 2021. How much carbon input is required to preserve or increase projected soil organic carbon stocks in German croplands under climate change? Plant and Soil 460, 417–433.
9. Georgiou, K., Jackson, R.B., Vinduˇskov´ a, O., Abramoff, R.Z., Ahlstrom, ¨ A., Feng, W., Harden, J.W., Pellegrini, A.F.A., Polley, H.W., Soong, J.L., Riley, W.J., Torn, M.S., 2022. Global stocks and capacity of mineral-associated soil organic carbon. Nat. Commun. 13.
10. Zhao, F., Wu, Y., Hui, J., Sivakumar, B., Meng, X., Liu, S., 2021. Projected soil organic carbon loss in response to climate warming and soil water content in a loess watershed. Carbon Balance Manag. 16, 1–14.
11. Abdi, N. 2006. Introducing carbon sequestration as an indicator for measuring the sustainable development of natural resources. Abstract Articles of the Third Conference on Sustainable Development in Agriculture and Natural Resources, Arak, Iran, December 5, 57-62. (In Persian)
12. Appiah-Badu, K., Anning, A.K., Eshun, B., and Mensah, G. 2022. Land use effects on tree species diversity and soil properties of the Awudua Forest, Ghana. Global Ecology and Conservation. 34, p.e02051.
13. Guo, L.B., and Gifford, R.M. 2002. Soil carbon stocks and land use change: a meta-analysis. Global Change Biology. 8: 4. 345-360.
14. Bastin, J.F., Finegold, Y., Garcia, C., Gellie, N., Lowe, A., Mollicone, D., Rezende, M., Routh, D., Sacande, M., Sparrow, B., Zohner, C.M., 2019. Response to comments on “The global tree restoration potential”. Science 366 (6463).
15. IPCC, 2019. Land is a critical resource, IPCC report says it is under pressure from humans and climate change, but it is part of the solution. Retrieved from. https://www.ipcc. ch/site/asset s/uploads/2019/08/Pr_SRCCL.pdf.
16. Gutierrez,S., Grados, D., Møller, A.B ., Gomes, L.D.C., Beucher, A.M., Franca Giannini-Kurina, F., Jonge, L.W., Greve, M.H. 2023. Unleashing the sequestration potential of soil organic carbon under climate and land use change scenarios in Danish agroecosystems, Science of the Total Environment 905 : 166921.
17. Forestry Management Booklet, Series 4, Division 3, Natural Resources and Watershed Management Organization of Mazandaran Province, 2006(In Persian).
18. Ghazashahi,J. 1997. Soil and plant analysis. Homa Publishing House, 311p. (In Persian)
19. Mahmodi-Taleghani, A., Zahedi-Amiri, GH., Adeli,E., Sagheb-Talebi, KH. 2007. Estimation of soil carbon sequestration in managed forests (Case Study of Golband Forest in the North of Iran). Journal of Iranian Forest and Poplar Research. 15: 241-252. (In Persian)
20. Forozeh, M.R., Heshmati, GH.A., GHanbarian, GH.A., Mesbah, S.H. 2008. Comparison of carbon monoxide power in 3 species of sunny, black Guinea and Artemisia plains in dry rangelands of Iran, Journal of Environmental Studies, Volume 34, Number 46, p 65- 72. (In Persian)
21. Farhadi Far,A., Dianti Tilki, Q.A., Koch, Y. 2018, comparison of soil carbon sequestration in three forest habitats, grassland and shrubland (case study: Kajur Nowshahr), the second national conference on natural resources and sustainable development in Zagros, Shahrekord.
22. Pahlavan-Yali, Z., Zarin kafsh, M., Moini, A. 2016. Quantitative estimation of soil carbon sequestration in 3 types of use (citrus, mallard and forest) in parts of Ramsar lands, north of Iran. Journal of Water and Soil Science. Volume 30, Number 3, Year 2016. P 758-e768. (In Persian)
23. Larionova, A.A., Rozonova. L. N., Evdokimov, I. V., and Ermollaev, A. M. 2002. Carbon budget in natura and anthropogenic forest steppe ecosystems. Poch vovedenie, 2: 177- 185.
24. Puget, P., Lal, R. (2005). Soil organic carbon and nitrogen in Mollisol in central ohio as affected by tillage and landuse. Soi Till. Res, 80, 201 – 213.
25. Mortenson, M., & G.E. Shuman., 2002. Carbon sequestration in rangeland interseeded with yellow-flowering Alfalfa (Medicago sativa spp. Falcata, USDA symposium on natural resource management to offset greenhouse gas emission in University Wyoming.
26. Alidadi, F., Hojjati , S.M., Mohammadreza Purmajidian, M.R., Kooch,Y. 2023. The effect of different types of landuse on the physical, chemical and carbon deposition characteristics of the soil along the Karkhe River, Journal of Wood and Forest Science and Technology,29 (4), 1-21. (In Persian)
27. Luciuk, G. M., M.A.Boonneau, D. M. Boyle, & E. vibery, 2000. Prairie farm rehabilition, inistration paper, carbon sequestration additional environmental, benefits of forests in the Prairie Farm bilitation Administration (PFRA). ID No 1967, Session 22: 191-194.
