Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Photosynthesis wikipedia , lookup
Carbon monoxide wikipedia , lookup
Biological Dynamics of Forest Fragments Project wikipedia , lookup
Biosphere 2 wikipedia , lookup
Overexploitation wikipedia , lookup
Human impact on the nitrogen cycle wikipedia , lookup
Renewable resource wikipedia , lookup
JCBPS; Section D; August 2015 – October 2015, Vol. 5, No. 4; 4664-4672. E- ISSN: 2249 –1929 Journal of Chemical, Biological and Physical Sciences An International Peer Review E-3 Journal of Sciences Available online atwww.jcbsc.org Section D: Environmental Sciences CODEN (USA): JCBPAT Research Article Stored carbon in Above Ground Biomass of dominant mangrove floral species in Sagar Island of Indian Sundarbans Sumana Bhattacharyya1, Abhijit Mitra2 and Atanu Kumar Raha1 1 Department of Forest & Environmental Science, Techno India University, Salt Lake Sector V, Kolkata, 700091,India 2 Department of Marine Science, University of Calcutta, 35 B.C. Road, Kolkata 700019,India Received: 26 July 2015; Revised: 7 August 2015; Accepted: 9 August 2015 Abstract: We assessed the Above Ground Biomass (AGB) and stored carbon in five dominant mangrove floral species in Sagar Island, the largest Island in Indian Sundarbans during July 2015. The above ground biomass was of the order Avicennia alba (35.59 tonnes/ha) > Avicennia marina (34.88 tonnes/ha) > Sonneratia apetala (31.67 tonnes/ha) > Avicennia officinalis (11.26 tonnes/ha) > Excoecaria agallocha (9.73 tonnes/ha). The above ground carbon was of the order Avicennia alba (15.75 tonnes/ha) > Avicennia marina (15.13 tonnes/ha) > Sonneratia apetala (13.72 tonnes/ha) > Avicennia officinalis (4.80 tonnes/ha) > Excoecaria agallocha (4.00 tonnes/ha). The study confirms the role of mangroves as potential sink of carbon dioxide. Keywords: Carbon stock, mangroves, above ground biomass (AGB) INTRODUCTION Mangrove ecosystems thrive along coastlines throughout most of the tropics and subtropics. These intertidal forests play important ecological and socioeconomic roles by acting as a nutrient filter between land and sea1, contributing to coastline protection2, providing commercial fisheries resources3 and nursery grounds for coastal fishes and crustaceans. Tropical forests in general are a disproportionately important component in the global carbon cycle, and are thought to represent 30-40% of the terrestrial net primary 4664 J. Chem. Bio. Phy. Sci. Sec. D, August 2015 – October 2015; Vol.5, No.4; 4664-4672. Stored carbon … Abhijit Mitra et. al. production4. Although the area covered by mangrove ecosystems represents only a small fraction of tropical forests, their position at the terrestrial-ocean interface and potential exchange with coastal water suggests these forests make a unique contribution to carbon biogeochemistry in coastal ocean5. The coastal zone (<200 m depth), covering ~7% of the ocean surface6 has an important role in the oceanic carbon cycle, and various estimates indicate that the majority of mineralization and burial of organic carbon, as well as carbonate production and accumulation takes place in the coastal ocean6,7. The potential impact of mangrove on coastal zone carbon dynamics has been a topic of intense debate during the past decades in particular, the “outwelling” hypothesis, first proposed for mangroves by several researchers8,9 suggested that a large fraction of the organic matter produced by mangrove trees is exported to the coastal ocean, where it forms the basis of a detritus food chain and thereby supports coastal fisheries. A number of recent studies have indicated that a direct tropic link between mangrove forest production and offshore secondary production is unlikely for many mangrove systems. Despite the large number of case studies dealing with various aspects of organic matter cycling in mangrove systems10, there is very limited consensus on the carbon sequestering potential of mangroves. The present study is therefore an attempt to establish a baseline data set of the carbon content in five dominant mangrove species in the Sagar Island of western Indian Sundarbans. Increased establishment of tree plantations in the tropics has long been suggested as a way of reducing the rate of increase in atmospheric CO211. As trees grow, they sequester carbon in their tissues, and as the amount of tree biomass increases (within a forest or in forest products), the increase in atmospheric CO 2 is mitigated. The ability of these plantations to sequester carbon has generated a lot of interest, since carbon sequestration projects in developing nations could receive investments from companies and governments wishing to offset their emissions of green house gases through the Kyoto Protocol’s Clean Development Mechanism12. An accurate estimate of carbon storage and sequestration is essential for any project related to plantation particularly in the sector of social forestry. In context to Gangetic delta region, this is extremely important as several Government, Non-Government Organizations and even foreign donors are participating in the mangrove afforestation programme owing to extreme vulnerability of the system to sea level rise, erosion and tidal surges. The rate of carbon sequestration in live tree biomass is computed by finding the difference between the carbon stocks of a population of trees at two different ages. MATERIALS AND METHODS The study site is located in the western part of Indian Sundarbans, at the apex of Bay of Bengal and locally the place is known as Beguakhali. Samplings were carried out during low tide period from 5 th to 15th July, 2015 in the intertidal mudflats of Beguakhali area. The plants in this site grew naturally since 1996 almost 20 years old. Plot size of 10 m × 10 m was selected for the study and the average readings were documented from 15 such plots (centre coordinates 21°38'54.37" N latitude and 88°03'06.17" E longitude). The mean relative abundance of each species was evaluated for the order of dominance of mangrove species at the study site. The above ground biomass of individual trees in each plot was estimated as per the standard procedure stated here and the average values of 15 plots were finally converted into biomass of five dominant mangrove species (in tonnes) per hectare in the study area. Above ground stem biomass estimation: The above ground (stem) biomass (AGB) for each species in 4665 J. Chem. Bio. Phy. Sci. Sec. D, August 2015 – October 2015; Vol.5, No.4; 4664-4672. Stored carbon … Abhijit Mitra et. al. every plot was estimated using non-destructive method in which the diameter at the breast height (DBH) was measured with a calliper and height with Ravi’s multimeter. Form factor was determined to find out the tree volume (V) using the standard formula given by several researchers13, 14. Specific gravity (G) was estimated taking the stem cores, which was further converted into stem biomass (BS) as per the expression BS = GV. The expression for V is FHπ R2, where F is the form factor, R is the radius of the tree derived from its DBH and H is the height of the target tree. The form factor F was estimated as per the standard procedure15. Above ground branch biomass estimation: The total number of branches irrespective of size was counted on each of the sample trees. These branches were categorized on the basis of basal diameter into three groups, viz. <6 cm, 6–10 cm and >10 cm. Fresh weight of two branches from each size group was recorded separately. Dry weight of branches was estimated using the standard equation16. Total branch biomass (dry weight) per sample tree was determined as per the expression: Bdb = n1bw1 + n2bw2 + n3bw3 = S nibwi Where, Bdb is the dry branch biomass per tree, ni the number of branches in the ith branch group, bwi the average weight of branches in the ith group and i = 1, 2, 3, . . .the branch groups. This procedure was followed for all the five dominant mangrove species separately Above ground leaf biomass estimation: Leaves from ten branches of (of all the three size groups) individual trees of each species were removed. One tree of each species per plot was considered for estimation. The leaves were weighed and oven dried separately (species wise) to a constant weight at 80 ± 50C. The leaf biomass was then estimated by multiplying the average biomass of the leaves per branch with the number of branches in a single tree and the average number of trees per plot as per the expression: Ldb = n1 Lw1N1 + n2Lw2N2 + ……….n5Lw5N5 Where, Ldb is the dry leaf biomass of dominant mangrove species per plot, ni ….n5 are the number of branches of each tree of five dominant species, Lw1 …..Lw5 are dry weight of leaves removed from ten branches of each of the five species and N1 to N5 are the number of trees per species in the plot. Carbon estimation: This method encompasses the direct estimation of percent carbon by a CHN analyzer. For this, a portion of fresh sample of stem, branch and leaf from thirty trees (two trees/species/plot) of individual species (covering all the 15 plots) was oven dried at 700C, randomly mixed and ground to pass through a 0.5 mm screen (1.0 mm screen for leaves). The carbon content (in %) was finally analyzed on a LECO® CHN-600 analyzer. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The biomass and productivity of mangrove forests have been studied mainly in terms of wood production, forest conservation, and ecosystem management17-22. The contemporary understanding of the global warming phenomenon, however, has generated interest in the carbon-stocking ability of mangroves. The carbon sequestration in this unique producer community is a function of biomass production capacity, which in turn depends upon interaction between edaphic, climate, and topographic factors of an area. Hence, results obtained at one place may not be applicable to another. Therefore region based potential of different land types needs to be worked out. In the present study, the results obtained have been compared 4666 J. Chem. Bio. Phy. Sci. Sec. D, August 2015 – October 2015; Vol.5, No.4; 4664-4672. Stored carbon … Abhijit Mitra et. al. with other regions of the world to evaluate the role of Indian Sundarbans mangrove as carbon sink on the background of changing scenario of the climate. Relative abundance Eight species of true mangroves were documented in the selected plots. The mean order of abundance of these species was Avicennia alba (23.33%) > Avicennia marina (20.00%) > Excoecaria agallocha (16.66%) > Sonneratia apetala (13.33%) = Avicennia officinalis (13.33%) > Acanthus ilicifolius (6.66%) > Aegiceros corniculatum (3.33%) = Bruguiera gymnorhiza (3.33%) (Table 1). Few mangrove associate floral species (like Porteresia coarctata, Suaeda sp. etc.) were also documented in the plots, but on the basis of relative abundance of the true mangrove species, only five dominant species namely, Avicennia alba, Avicennia marina, Excoecaria agallocha , Sonneratia apetala, and Avicennia officinalis were considered for carbon stock estimation in their respective above ground biomass. Table 1: Relative abundance of mangrove species (mean of 15 plots) in the study area Species No./100m2 Relative abundance (%) Sonneratia apetala 4 13.33 Excoecaria agallocha 5 16.66 Avicennia alba 7 23.33 Avicennia marina 6 20.00 Avicennia officinalis 4 13.33 Acanthus ilicifolius 2 6.66 Aegiceros corniculatum 1 3.33 Bruguiera gymnorrhiza 1 3.33 Above ground stem biomass: The above ground stem biomass of the dominant mangrove trees were 19.79 t ha-1, 5.83 t ha-1, 20.22 t ha-1, 21.14 t ha-1, and 6.70 t ha-1 for Sonneratia apetala, Excoecaria agallocha, Avicennia alba, Avicennia marina, and Avicennia officinalis respectively (Table 2). These values are comparatively lesser to the data of Komiyama et al 23 in a secondary mangrove (Ceriops tagal) forest at Southern Thailand. The stem biomass formed 62.49%, 59.92%, 56.81%, 60.61% and 59.50% of the total above ground biomass of Sonneratia apetala, Excoecaria agallocha, Avicennia alba, Avicennia marina and Avicennia officinalis respectively. 4667 J. Chem. Bio. Phy. Sci. Sec. D, August 2015 – October 2015; Vol.5, No.4; 4664-4672. Stored carbon … Abhijit Mitra et. al. Above ground branch biomass: The above ground branch biomass of the dominant mangrove trees were 7.92 t ha-1, 2.56 t ha-1, 9.91 t ha-1, 8.67 t ha-1, and 3.15 t ha-1 for Sonneratia apetala, Excoecaria agallocha, Avicennia alba, Avicennia marina, and Avicennia officinalis respectively (Table 2). These values are much less to the branch biomass value in a secondary mangrove (Ceriops tagal) forest at Southern Thailand as documented by Komiyama et al (2000)24. The branch biomass constituted 25.01%, 26.31%, 27.84%, 24.86%, 27.98% of the total above ground biomass of Sonneratia apetala, Excoecaria agallocha, Avicennia alba, Avicennia marina, and Avicennia officinalis respectively. Above ground leaf biomass: The leaf biomass in the study site was 3.96 t ha -1 for Sonneratia apetala, 1.34 t ha -1 for Excoecaria agallocha, 5.46 t ha-1 for Avicennia alba, 5.07 t ha-1 for Avicennia marina, and 1.41 t ha-1 for Avicennia officinalis (Table 2), which are comparatively lesser to the records of other workers like 12.1 -15.0 t ha-1 in Avicennia forests25, 6.2 – 20.2 t ha-1 in Rhizophora apiculata young plantations26, 13.3 t ha-1 in Rhizophora patch27 and 8.1 t ha-1 in a matured Rhizophora forest18. In context to Indian mangrove system, the mangrove litter production was recorded as 7.50 tonnes/ha/yr in Pichavaram at Tamil Nadu28, in which leaf biomass amounts to about 80 – 90%29. Our results are lower than the Pichavaram mangrove ecosystem in the east coast of India, which may be attributed to the trend of rising salinity due to siltation of Bidyadhari River in the present geographical locale30. The growth, survival, and biomass of mangroves depend on appropriate dilution of the brackish water system with fresh water. The eastern sector of Indian Sundarbans hardly witness such dilution as the freshwater discharge of the Ganga-Bhagirathi system cannot reach the area due to clogging of the Bidyadhari River by heavy silt and solid wastes. Table 2: Above ground biomass (t/ha) of five dominant mangrove species in the intertidal mudflats of Sagar Island Mangrove Sonneratia Excoecaria Avicennia Avicennia vegetative apetala agallocha alba marina part Avicennia officinalis Stem 19.79 5.83 20.22 21.14 6.70 Branch 7.92 2.56 9.91 8.67 3.15 Leaf 3.96 1.34 5.46 5.07 1.41 Total (AGB) 31.67 9.73 35.59 34.88 11.26 Comparison of carbon stocks: Mangroves are unique storehouse for carbon. The global storage of carbon in mangrove biomass is estimated to be 4.03 pg, 70% of which occurs in coastal margins from 0 0 to 100 latitude5. For the present study, the results of carbon stock in the above ground biomass of the 4668 J. Chem. Bio. Phy. Sci. Sec. D, August 2015 – October 2015; Vol.5, No.4; 4664-4672. Stored carbon … Abhijit Mitra et. al. selected species are shown in Table 3. Species wise carbon content are in the order Avicennia alba> Avicennia marina> Sonneratia apetala> Avicennia officinalis > Excoecaria agallocha. Table 3: Above ground carbon stock (t/ha) of five dominant mangrove species in the intertidal mudflats of Sagar Island Mangrove vegetative part Sonneratia apetala Excoecaria agallocha Avicennia alba Avicennia marina Avicennia officinalis Stem 8.91 2.43 9.39 9.63 3.08 Branch 3.23 1.05 4.31 3.68 1.24 Leaf 1.58 0.52 2.05 1.82 0.48 Total (AGB) 13.72 4.00 15.75 15.13 4.80 Considering the values of stored carbon, the CO2 equivalents per hectare for Sonneratia apetala, Avicennia alba, Avicennia marina, Avicennia officinalis and Excoecaria agallocha are 54.24 t, 61.58 t, 59.78 t, 19.16 t, and 16.29 t respectively, which are effective figures when the present trend of atmospheric CO2 rise is 4% per decade31. These figures can be manipulated through effective soil management and proper dilution of the system with freshwater, which are important requisites for accelerating the biomass of mangrove species. The data generated in the present geographical locale are not in alignment (in terms of magnitude) to the stored carbon in different categories of mangrove ecosystems of Asia – Pacific region. In a Rhizophora apiculata dominated coral reef mangrove habitat consisting of a 2 m thick mangrove peat layer in Phonpei island in Pacific, the stored carbon was estimated as 130 Kg C m-2 (=1300 t C ha-1), and in a estuary type habitat, the value reached about 200 Kg C m-2 as noted by a group of reseachers32. Although the role of mangroves as sink of carbon is established through this study, but more effort towards standardization of the techniques is needed to reach precision. Accurate measurement and accounting for changes in carbon stores are not only important for certification and verification of carbon credits, but would help stabilize market prices for such credit system. Inaccurate accounting or forecasting of forest carbon stores could disrupt the market for credits, as evidenced by the recent market crash in Europe that resulted from a lack of transparency, poor forecasting of emissions, and over allocations of allowances33. CONCLUSION Mangrove forests, mostly concentrated at the land-sea interface and estuarine delta naturally sequester carbon dioxide during photosynthesis. Over time carbon accumulates in the trees, forest- floor (in litter) and especially soil. Approximately around 45% of the dry above ground biomass of trees is made up of 4669 J. Chem. Bio. Phy. Sci. Sec. D, August 2015 – October 2015; Vol.5, No.4; 4664-4672. Stored carbon … Abhijit Mitra et. al. carbon (as revealed from direct %C analysis through CHN analyzer); thus as long as the tree is growing and accumulating biomass, it is accumulating carbon. Here we provide a comprehensive real time data on carbon stock in a forest patch of Sagar Island in western Indian Sundarbans of 20 years old. However, simply growing a forest or changing the way an existing forest is managed does not create forest carbon credits. Projects must be pre-approved, baselines established, and carbon stores or changes in carbon stocks must be determined with high precision before credits can be certified. REFERENCES 1. A. I. Robertson and M. J. Phillips, Mangroves as filters of shrimp pond effluent Prediction and biogeochemical research needs, Hydrobiological, 1995, 295, 311-321. 2. J. E. Vermatt and U. Thampanya, Mangroves mitigate tsunami damage: A further response, Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science, 2006, 69, 1-3. 3. R. Constanza et al., The value of the world’s ecosystem service and natural capital. Ecological Economics, 1997, 25, 3-15. 4. D. A. Clark, S. Brown, D. W. Kiicklighter, J. Q. Chambers, J. R. J. Ni Thomlinson and E. A. Holland, Measuring net primary production in forest: An evaluation and synthesis of existing field data, Ecological Application, 2001, 11, 371-384. 5. R. R. Twilley, R. H. Chen and T. Hargis, Carbon sinks in mangrove forests and their implications to the carbon budget of tropical coastal ecosystems, Water Air and Soil Pollution, 1992, 64, 265288. 6. J. P. Gattuso, M. Frankignoulle and R. Wollast, Carbon and carbonate metabolism in coastal ecosystems, Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 1998, 29, 405-434. 7. F. T. Mackenzie, A. Lerman and A. J. Andersson, Past and present of sediment of carbon biogeochemical cycling models, Biogeoscience, 2004, 1, 11-32. 8. E. P. Odum, A research challenge: Evaluating the productivity of coastal and estuarine waters, Proceedings of the 2 sea grant conference, Univ. of Rhode Island Kingston; 1968, 63-64. 9. W. E. Odum and E. J. Heald, Trophic analysis of an estuarine mangrove community, Bulletin of Marine Science, 1972, 22, 671-738. 10. E. Kristensen, S. Bouillon, T. Dittmar and C. Marchand, Organic carbon dynamics in mangrove ecosystems: A review, Aquatic Botany, 2008, 89, 201–219. 11. F.J. Dyson, Can we control the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere? Energy (Oxford)., 1977, 2, 287291. 12. P.M. Fearnside, Forests and global warming mitigation in Brazil opportunities in the Brazilian forest sector for responses to global warming under the “clean development mechanism”. Biomass Bioenergy, 1999, 16, 171-189. 13. M. Pressler, D. G. der stambildung Leipzig., 1985, 153 p. 4670 J. Chem. Bio. Phy. Sci. Sec. D, August 2015 – October 2015; Vol.5, No.4; 4664-4672. Stored carbon … Abhijit Mitra et. al. 14. W. Bitterlich, The relaskop idea slough: Commonwealth Agricultural Bureause, Farnham Royal, England, 1984. 15. D. N. Koul and P. Panwar, Prioritizing land-management options for carbon sequestration potential, Current Science, 2008, 95, 5-10. 16. E. N. Chidumaya, Aboveground woody biomass structure and woodland, Forest Ecology and Management, 1990, 36, 33-46. productivity in a Zambezian 17. F. E. Putz and H. T. Chan, Tree growth Dynamics and productivity in a mature mangrove forest in Malaysia, Forest Ecology and Management, 1986, 17, 211-230. 18. S. Tamai, T. Nakasuga, R. Tabuchi and K. Ogino, Standing biomass of mangrove forests in Southern Thailand, Journal of Japan Forest Society, 1986, 68, 384-388. 19. A. Komiyama, K. Ogino, S. Aksomkoae and S. Sabhasri, Root biomass of a mangrove forest in southern Thailand 1. Estimation by the trench method and the zonal structure of root biomass, Journal of tropical Ecology, 1987, 3, 97-108. 20. B. F. Clough and K. Scott, Allometric relationship for estimating above ground biomass in six mangrove species, Forest Ecology and Management, 1989, 27, 117-127. 21. K. L. McKee, Interspecific variation in growth biomass partitioning and defensive characteristics of neotropical mangrove seedlings response to light and nutrient availability, American Journal of Botany, 1995, 82, 299-307. 22. J. E. Ong, W. K. Gong and B. F. Clough, Structure and productivity of a 20- year old stand of Rhizophora apiculata BL mangrove forest, Journal of Biogeography, 1995, 55, 417-424. 23. A. Komiyama, A. W. b. Rasib, S. Kato, T. Takeuchi, I. Nagano and E. Ito, Net primary production of a 110-year-old deciduous hardwood forest; Proceedings of 21st century centre of excellence programme on “Satellite Ecology”, Gifu University, Gifu Prefecture, Japan; 27th Feb, 2007, pp. 112-118. 24. A. Komiyama, S. Havanond, W. Srisawatt, Y. Mochida, K. Fujimoto, T. Ohnishi, S. Ishihara and T. Miyagi, Top root biomass ratio of secondary mangrove (Ceriops tagal (Perr.) C.B Rob. ) forest, Forest Ecology and Management, 2000, 139, 127- 134. 25. S. V. Briggs, Estimates of biomass in a temperate mangrove community, Australian Journal Ecology, 1977, 2, 369-373. 26. S. Aksomkoae, Structure regeneration and productivity of mangroves in Thailand. Ph.D. Dissertation, Michigan State University, 1975, 1-109 pp. 27. A. A. De la Cruz and B. F. Banaag, The ecology of a small mangrove patch in Matabungkay Beach Batangas Province, Natural and Applied Science Bulletin, 1967, 20, 486-494. 28. K. Krishnamurthy, The changing landscape of the Indian Mangrove. Proceedings of the natural symposium on biology, utilization and conservation of mangroves, Tamil Nadu, 1985, 119-126. 4671 J. Chem. Bio. Phy. Sci. Sec. D, August 2015 – October 2015; Vol.5, No.4; 4664-4672. Stored carbon … Abhijit Mitra et. al. 29. V. K. Yadav and A. Choudhury, Litter production in mangrove forest of Lothian island in Sunderbans, Proceedings of the natural symposium on biology, utilization and conservation of mangroves, 1985, 227-229. 30. A. B. Chaudhuri and A. Choudhury, Mangroves of the Sundarbans, India, IUCN- The World Conservation Union, 1994, 1. 31. J. H. Kil and E. Gregory McPherson, Carbon storage and flux in urban residential greenspace, Journal of Environmental Management, 2001, 61, 165-177. 32. K. Fujimoto, A. Imaya, R. Tabuchi, S. Kuramoto, H. Utsugi and T. Murofushi, Below ground carbon storage of Micronesian mangrove forest, Ecological Research, 1999, 14, 409-413. 33. B. Scarborough and R. Meiners, Trading Forest Carbon: A Panacea or Pipe Dream to Address Climate Change? 2007, Issue No. Ps-40 July. * Corresponding author: Abhijit Mitra; Department of Marine Science, University of Calcutta, 35 B.C. Road, Kolkata 700019 4672 J. Chem. Bio. Phy. Sci. Sec. D, August 2015 – October 2015; Vol.5, No.4; 4664-4672.