=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-1152/paper52
|storemode=property
|title=Inventory of Carbon Sequestration In Artemisia Lands of Hamadan Province
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1152/paper52.pdf
|volume=Vol-1152
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/haicta/JavadiANR11
}}
==Inventory of Carbon Sequestration In Artemisia Lands of Hamadan Province==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1152/paper52.pdf
Inventory of carbon sequestration in Artemisia lands of
Hamadan province
Seyed Akbar Javadi 1, GH.Zahedi Amiri 2, M.naderi 3, F.Raoofi 4
1
Department of Range management, Science and Research branch, Islamic Azad
University, Tehran, Iran. e-mail:sadynan@yahoo.com
2
Faculty of Natural Resources, Tehran University.
3,4
M.Sc. student in range management. Science and Research branch, Islamic Azad
University, Tehran, Iran.
Abstract. Climate change is one of the most important challenges in
sustainable development which has negative effect on terrestrial and aquatic
ecosystem. The lead factor of this phenomenon is Co2 accumulation in
atmosphere. One of the suitable ways of facing the mentioned issue is carbon
sequestration in plant biomass and soil as a simple as well as inexpensive
refined way in rangelands. With respect to the fact that Artemisia lands occupy
an extensive part of the rangelands in Iran, in order to investigate the role of
Artemisia lands in carbon sequestration, an area of Artemisia sieberi vegetation
type in Hamadan province was selected and the content of aboveground and
underground biomass carbon and soil organic carbon was determined. The
result showed that the total carbon sequestration per hectare was 287.49 kg/ha
and 90% of total carbon sequestration was soil organic carbon. The results of
biomass carbon distribution showed that the carbon content in aerial biomass
was more than underground biomass. Among the different parts of aerial
biomass, the greatest storage was related to foliage carbon. Within proper
range management in rangeland ecosystems, a major step forward in rising
plant biomass could be taken. On the other hand, any attempt to restore lost
natural resources could increase carbon sequestration.
Keywords: Carbon sequestration, soil carbon, Biomass, Artemisia lands.
1 Introduction
Climate change is one of the most important challenges in sustainable
development that bears a negative effect on aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. The
lead factor of climate change is co2 accumulation in atmosphere (Petit et al,
1999).For the reason that reduction of co2 in atmosphere by artificial ways is
extremely expensive (Cannel et al, 1992) thus carbon sequestration is the simplest
and the most economically practical way in order to face with climate change crisis
________________________________
Copyright ©by the paper’s authors. Copying permitted only for private and academic purposes.
In: M. Salampasis, A. Matopoulos (eds.): Proceedings of the International Conference on Information
and Communication Technologies
for Sustainable Agri-production and Environment (HAICTA 2011), Skiathos, 8-11 September, 2011.
601
(Dixon et al 1997).One of the suitable options for carbon sequestration is arid and
semi arid rangelands. Rangelands occupy approximately half of the area of dry lands
and over one third of underground and aboveground storages of carbon in dry lands
is located within them (Allen-Diaz1996).Although the aerial and underground parts
in rangelands compared to forests are lesser but they play a more striking role in
carbon sequestration as they are more expansive than forests comprising 38% of dry
lands (Lciuk et al, 2000 and Snorronson et al, 2002).
Schuman et al (1999) indicated that live stock grazing results in an increase in soil
carbon content in depth of 30 centimeter rather than treatments without grazing. Sing
etal (2003) in India stated that there was appositive relation between soil organic
carbon and vegetation cover. In this study, the content of carbon in plant organ and
soil in a favorable vegetation cover was estimated about 1.96 -2.83 and 3.06-6.38 per
hectare respectively but in an unfavorable vegetation cover it was 0.24-1.37 and
1.13-5.18 per hectare. Aradottir etal (2000) concluded that the amount of carbon
differs among the methods of reviving dry lands. However, as a basic principle the
amount of carbon in soil is more than that in root biomass but the carbon storage in
aerial biomass rises across the time rather than the soil and the amount of aerial
biomass is mostly more than the roots. Abdi (2005) reached a conclusion on
estimation of carbon sequestration in Astragalus lands located in Markazi province
that soil organic carbon forms 87%of total carbon sequestration. And the results of
total biomass emission showed that carbon storage in aerial biomass has been more
than roots. Also, there was a significantly positive correlation between carbon
sequestration with shrub’s volume as well as height, total biomass, litter and soil
organic carbon.
Kolahchi (2005) drew a conclusion from investigation of carbon sequestration
content in dominant shrubs and soil of enclosed pastures located in Heidarposht
Hamadan province that the major amount of carbon sequestration was for Astragalus
lands and there is a significant relation between slope direction and vegetation cover.
On the other hand, the content of increase in soil organic carbon is not a function of
height shifts.
Aghafashami (2007) on cognition of pasture potential to store carbon
sequestration in southern of central Alborz in either of grazed and enclosed parts for
two types of forbs and shrubs concluded that there was not a significant relation
between plant carbon of shrub lands in either of grazed and enclosed parts at the
level of 5% and no significant difference was observed between the types of shrubs
and forbs through comparing these factors among them at the level of 5%. Also, the
amount of soil organic carbon in grazing conditions has been greater than that of
enclosed pastures.
Mahdavi (2008) through investigating the effect of plant distance Planting
distance, pruning height and pruning time upon the amount of carbon sequestration
in Atriplex lentiformis in Isfahan Ardestan found that there was a significant
difference between planting distance and pruning height with carbon storage of aerial
biomass as well as root at the level of 5 %. But none of these treatments bore a
significant effect upon soil organic carbon storage.
Pastures are the most expansive vital lands in Iran with an area of about 86 million
hectares. UN office of civil (2000) announced that the pastures in Iran bear a great
capacity by 1 million ton carbon for carbon sequestration, Provided that they are to
602
be revived. Regarding the fact that Artemisia sieberi is considered as a dominant
shrub species in arid and semi arid rangelands, it is of great importance for forage
production of livestock, erosion resistance as well as soil preservation. Besides, it
could be of wider significance for bioenvironmental aspects like carbon
sequestration. Thus, this study has been launched to find out the amount of carbon
storage in various parts of Artemisia including aerial parts (leaves and stem) as well
as root. Also, the relation between the amount of carbon in these organs within each
other and soil carbon was investigated.
2 Materials and Methods
2.1 Study area
The area at issue is located in 49 13 11 longitude and 35 16 13 latitude, 18 km
away from east of Rezen, in the north east of Hamadan that is considered as up-
country pastures of Hamadan province. the climate is cold step, semi arid with long
term mean of rain about 342.9 mm, soil texture is clay to clay-loam with a height of
1850 to 1900 m above the surface of sea (Anonymous,2005).
2.2 Sampling method
After gathering of documentary information and present maps of the study area,
using minimal area, an area of 1m2 was designated for each plot. Regarding the
vegetative condition of the site, 30 plots were applied. Then, after determining the
number and dimention of plot, certain points were plotted through which despite of
production, percentage of vegetation cover, percentage of stone, percentage of bare
soil as well as litter were measured. In order to evaluate the aerial biomass in
Aremisia, clipping method was used up. concerning the matter that shrubs have a
strong root system, in addition, the proportion of stem to root in arid and semi arid
areas is more than one, samples were taken from the depth of 15 cm of soil surface to
assess the amount of carbon sequestration.
After transferring the samples to the laboratory, samples of stem, leaf and root
were isolated then soon after being dryed in fresh air, Combustion in an electric
furnace method was used up that last for 3 hours in 550 cg then, the amount of
organic carbon was determined by the residual weigh of ash. The measurement
of organic soil was taken upon Valk Black method (MacDicken, 1997 and Jafari,
2003).
603
2.4 Analyzing method
First, minimum and maximum mean as well as standard variance of the
measured features in plots was taken. In order to analyze data, Spss13 and
Minitab were applied. At the beginning concerning the matter that the units of
dependent and independent units were distinctly different, all the data were
standardized then, normalizing was carried out and using normalized data,
regressive analyzing was conducted. To find out the relation between vegetation
cover, soil, topography as well as carbon sequestration, correlation indices were
calculated by Pierson method among the factors.
3 Results
The summary of statistics including minimum and maximum mean as well as
standard variation on total mean of whole plots of the area at issue has been
given in table 1.total sequestered carbon per unit area in the study area was
287.86 kg/ha, of the total sequestered carbon, soil organic carbon content was
259.12 kg (90%), biomass carbon content was 28.74 (10%) (table1). The results
indicated that of the total sequestered carbon in biomass, 68.89%, 31.1% have
been related to aerial and underground biomass respectively.
Table 1. Summary of statistics including minimum and maximum mean as well as
standard variation on mean of 30 plots in Gharaghie.
feature Standard maximum minimum mean
variation
Height 10.75 1889 1850 1868.76
above the
surface of
sea
Soil 0.19 1.68 1.01 1.38
apparent
weigh g/cm3
Slope 2.42 9.76 0 4.41
percent
Vegetatio 9.32 73 38 54.8
n cover
percent
604
Stone 6.57 28 3 13.4
percent
Litter 3.76 19 4 12.26
percent
Naked soil 10.01 43 3 19.33
percent
Soil 5.1 34.11 5.13 14.85
carbon kg/ha
Stem 1.7 11.37 1.78 4.95
carbon kg/ha
Root 3.61 15.74 3.51 8.94
carbon kg/ha
Total 3.47 20.4 3.47 28.74
biomass
carbon kg/ha
Soil 116.35 447.61 99.36 259.12
organic
carbon kg/ha
Total 126.1 127.2 27.44 287.86
carbon
sequestration
3.1 Regressive equations among carbon storage (leaf, stem, and root) and
vegetation factors, topography, soil:
A- Leaf carbon
Leaf carbon as a dependent variable as well as soil factors, vegetation cover and
topography as independent variables were investigated. Results of table 2 indicated
that leaf carbon was related just with stem carbon that correlation index by 99% and
the relation between these two variables were significant at least at the level of 1%.
The regressive model will be in this way:
C1 = Cst + 3.33 (1)
Table 2. results of regression analyze of leaf carbon with stem carbon in Gharaghie
605
Significance level Leaf carbon assumption
0.0001 99% Stem carbon
B- Root carbon
Root carbon as a dependent variable and litter as independent were studied and
the results of table 2 illustrates that root carbon was significantly related just with
stone percent and bare soil percent. The relation index among these two variables
was 90% and the relation between these two variables was significant at least at the
level of 65%.Regressive model will be:
Cr = 0.586Lt + 2.87 (2)
Table 2. results of regression analyze of root carbon with litter in Gharaghie
Significance level Root carbon assumption
0.016 65% Stem carbon
C- Soil organic carbon
Soil organic carbon as dependent variable and the other elements as independent
were investigated and the results in table 3 showed that there is a significant relation
between soil organic carbon with soil bulk density and leaf carbon. Correlation index
among these two factors (soil organic carbon and soil bulk density has been 99% and
the relation between these two variables has been significant at the confidence level
of 75%. Correlation index between two variables equals with 98% and the relation
between two variables has been significant at least at the confidence level of 43%.
The multiple regression model of soil carbon with soil bulk density is:
Cs = 0.614Wt – 42.1 (3)
The multiple regression model of soil carbon with leaf carbon is:
Cs = 0.437C1 – 6.12 (4)
Table 3. Results of regression analyze of soil organic carbon with soil bulk density and leaf
carbon in Gharaghie
Significance level Soil organic carbon assumption
0.007 0.75 soil bulk density
0.02 0.43 Leaf carbon
606
4 Discussion
The total mean of carbon sequestered was estimated about 287.49 kg/ha.
Regarding the fact that of the total carbon sequestration, the content of soil carbon
has been more than 90%.thus, it could be stated that, range land ecosystems
especially soil of Artemisia lands is the most important organic carbon resource.
Researches carried out by Aradotir etal (2000) confirmed this issue. The results of
total biomass carbon emission showed that the storage of carbon in aerial biomass is
more than roots. Aradotir etal (2000) observed similar results. According to the
correlation indices among the features at issue (table 2) there was a positive relation
between soil organic carbon and soil bulk density .This content was the greatest in
western slopes that on account of the highest percentage of vegetation cover as a
result of which, the highest amount of litter in soil, it has the greatest soil bulk
density and the greatest amount of soil organic carbon as well. These results are
similar to Kolahchi (2005). Soil organic carbon and leaf as well as stem carbon were
positively related. Soil organic carbon is dependent upon plant organ carbon. Abdi
(2005) and Agha fashami (2007) observed similar results. There was a significantly
negative relation among vegetation cover and slope direction. The percentage of
vegetation cover in northern and eastern slopes was greater than that of southern and
eastern slopes and it was due to Angle of solar radiation and following that, the litter
content of the soil surface is depleted as well. Kolahchi (2005) observed similar
results. With regard to the results of carbon content among different parts of plant,
leaf carbon was the greatest of all (14.85kg/ha) and for the reason that Artemisia
sieberi is a deciduous plant, the content of annual sequestered carbon of leaves is
precisely related to that year which involves 52% of sequestered carbon of plant. The
amount of sequestered carbon of the other plant organs depends upon the content of
sequestered carbon in leaf in a way that a positive relation was observed among leaf
and stem carbon.
Generally it could be concluded that the total carbon sequestration in unit area
Artemisia lands is related to vegetation cover, biomass as well as its components, soil
organic carbon and litter. In order to make an increase in carbon sequestration these
three factors: soil, biomass and litter should be taken in to account and any
fluctuation on these factors will affect carbon storage. Thus, within proper range
management in rangeland ecosystems, a major step forward in rising plant biomass
could be taken. On the other hand, any attempt to restore lost natural resources could
increase carbon sequestration. Regarding the fact that a large proportion of
sequestered carbon was in soil, therefore, each biological or mechanical procedure
preventing downward trend of soil will be a positive step to manage carbon
sequestration (Izaurralde etal, 2007). Range management should involve everything
in a way that in addition to sustainable exploit, carbon sequestration should be
considered as well.
607
References
1. Abdi.N.(2005)estimayion of sequestering capacity by Astragalus genus in
Markazi and Isfahan provinces. PhD thesis. Science and research branch,
Islamic Azad University.
2. Agha fashami.M. (2007) Investigation of carbon sequestration in south of
Alborz. PhD thesis. Science and research branch, Islamic Azad University.
3. Allen-Diaz, B. (1996) Rangelands in a changing climate: impacts adaptation
and mitigation.In: Impacts, adaptations and mitigation of climate change:
scientific-technical analysis. Published for the intergovernmental panel on
climate change. Cambridge University press, Cambridge, Uk. 131-158.
4. Anonymous. (2005) natural of Hamedan province. Natural resources office
of Hamedan province.
5. Aradottir, A., Savarsdottir, L., Kristin, H., Jonsson, P. and Gudbergsson, G.
(2000) Carbon accumulation in vegetation and soilds by reclamation of
degraded area.Icelandic Agriculture Sciences. 13. 99-113.
6. Cannel, M., Dewark, R.C., and Thornley, J.H.M. (1992) Carbon flux and
storage in European forest. In: Teller, A., Mathy, P., Jeffers, J.N.R (Eds),
Rwsponses of forest ecosystems to environment changes. Elsevier New
York.256-271.
7. Dixon, R.K., Winjun, J.K., Adrasko, K.J., and Schroeder, P.E. (1994)
Integrated land-use system: assessment of promising agroforest and
alternative land-use practices to enhance carbon conservation and
sequestration climate change. 30: 1-23.
8. Izaurralde,R., Williams, C.J.R. Post, W.M., and Thomson, A.M. (2007)
Long-term modeling of soil carbon erosion and sequestration at the small
watershed scale. Climate changes. 80 (1-2). 73-90.
9. Jafari.H.M. (2003) Analysis methods of soil. Nedaye zohi pub.p:158.
10.Kolahchi.N. (2005) investigation of carbon sequestration in shrub and
rangeland soil in Hamedan provinces. Msc thesis. Science and research
branch, Islamic Azad University.
608
11.Luciuk, G.M., Binneav,M.A., Boyle, D.M., and Vibery, E.(2000) Prairie
farm rehabilitation. Administration paper, Carbon sequestration-
Additional Environmental Benefits of forest in the PERA.
12.Mahdavi.KH.S.(2008) investigation effect of removing intensity,planting
density and utilization period on carbon sequestration in Atriplex
lentiformis pastures in Ardestan Esfahan. PhD thesis. Science and research
branch, Islamic Azad University.
13.McDicken K.G. (1997) A Guide to monitoring carbon storage in forestry
and agro forestry projects.Winrock International Arlington, VA, USA, 87.
14.Petit,j.R., Jouzel , J., Raynaud, M., Barnola,M., Chappelaz , J., Davis , M.,
Delayque , M., Kotlyakov , M., Legrand , M., Lipenakov, V., Lorius , C.,
Pepin, l., Ritz, C., Saltzman , E., and Stivenard, M. (1999) Climate and
atmospheric history of past 4200. Years from the vostock ice core,
Antarctica. Nature 399.429-436.
15.Schuman.G.E. Reeder,J.P., Manley, J.T., Hart, R.H., Manley, W.A. (1999)
Impact of grazing management on the carbon and nitrogen balance of a
mixed-grass rangeland. Ecological Application, 9, 65-71.
16.Sing, G., Bala, N., Chaudhuri, K.K. and Meena, R.L. (2003) Carbon
sequestration potential of common access resource in arid and semi arid
region of northwestern India. Indian Forest 129. 859-864.
17.Snorranson, A., Sigurdsson, B.D.,Gudberysson,G., Svavars, dottir, K., and
Jonsson, T.H.H. (2002) Carbon sequestration in forest plantations in
Iceland. Burisindi. 15. 81- 93.
609