Volume 7, Issue 3, June 2018, Page: 65-74
Soil Carbon Sequestration Differentials among Key Forest Plantation Species in Kenya: Promising Opportunities for Sustainable Development Mechanism
Vincent Onguso Oeba, African Forest Forum, Nairobi, Kenya
Samuel Chang Jwok Otor, Department of Environmental Sciences, Kenyatta University, Nairobi, Kenya
James Biu Kung’u, Department of Environmental Sciences, Kenyatta University, Nairobi, Kenya
Mbae Njugi Muchiri, Kenya Forestry Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya
Larwanou Mahamane, African Forest Forum, Nairobi, Kenya
Received: May 15, 2018;       Accepted: Jun. 14, 2018;       Published: Jul. 31, 2018
DOI: 10.11648/j.aff.20180703.11      View  692      Downloads  89
Abstract
Soil organic carbon (SOC) contributes to the productivity of forests and enhances carbon sink in forest ecosystem. However, the available data on forest based carbon projects among African countries that have ratified Kyoto Protocol and are party to United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) shows little emphasis on SOC, deadwood and litter. Kenya, for example, has piloted five afforestation and reforestation Clean Development Mechanism (AR-CDM) activities in government forests of which none addresses SOC, and yet studies elsewhere have shown that forest soils consist about 73 % of global carbon storage. This study therefore, sought to determine soil carbon sequestration differentials among selected key forest plantations in Kenya and their future implications on sustainable development mechanism. Soils were sampled at 0-20, 20-50 and 50-80 cm depth from Pinus patula, Cupressus lusitanica, Juniperus procera and Eucalyptus saligna/grandis plantations in Central Kenya for analysis of carbon, soil pH, nitrogen, phosphorous and potassium. The litter-fall collected from each of these forest plantations were analysed for nitrogen and carbon. The Pinus patula plantations had significantly (p<0.01) higher amount of soil carbon (132.2 ± 12.55 MgC ha-1) as compared with Cupressus lusitanica (114.4 ± 12.55 MgC ha-1) and Eucalyptus saligna (85.0 ± 12.55 MgC ha-1) plantations. Specifically, Pinus patula plantation had sequestered almost twice of soil carbon as compared to above and below-ground carbon pools whereas that of Cupressus lusitanica and Eucalyptus saligna /grandis were about 1.2 and 1.3 times higher, respectively. The levels of acidity varied among species, between and within sites from very strongly acidic to very slightly acidic. The amount of soil nitrogen, phosphorous and potassium between sites, tree species and soil depths differed significantly. This study therefore reveals soil carbon potentials in forest plantations that need to be considered in the development and implementation of afforestation and reforestation activities under Clean/Sustainable Development Mechanism (SDM). Equally, differences on soil carbon sequestered among species need to be taken into account when evaluating carbon stocks under certified and voluntary carbon offset markets in order to promote trees with high potential of carbon sequestration for sustainable development. This is important because, introduction of Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD+) and forest based Clean Development Mechanisms (CDM) have provided impetus to African governments in implementing afforestation and reforestation (AR) programmes to enhance carbon stock and improve resilience of biophysical and social systems against impacts of climate of change.
Keywords
Soil Carbon Sequestration, Forest Plantations, Soil Organic Carbon, Sustainable Development Mechanism
To cite this article
Vincent Onguso Oeba, Samuel Chang Jwok Otor, James Biu Kung’u, Mbae Njugi Muchiri, Larwanou Mahamane, Soil Carbon Sequestration Differentials among Key Forest Plantation Species in Kenya: Promising Opportunities for Sustainable Development Mechanism, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. Vol. 7, No. 3, 2018, pp. 65-74. doi: 10.11648/j.aff.20180703.11
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Reference
[1]
Liu Yan, Li Suyan, Sun Xiangyang, Yu Xin. Variations of forest soil organic carbon and its influencing factors in east China. Annals of Forest Science 73:501–511, 2016.
[2]
Kumar Amit, Sharma M. P. Estimation of soil organic carbon in the forest catchment of two hydroelectric reservoirs in the Uttarakhand, India. Human Ecological Risk Assessment 22 (4): 991-1001, 2016.
[3]
Djukic. I, et al. Early stage litter decomposition across biomes. Sci Total Environ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.01.012, 2018.
[4]
FAO. Global forest resources assessment, 2015. Rome (available at http://www.fao.org/3/a-i4808e.pdf, last accessed 26 February 2018.
[5]
Keenan Rodney J, Reams Gregory A, Achard Frédéric. de Freitas Joberto V. Grainger Alan. Lindquist Erik. Dynamics of global forest area: Results from the FAO Global Forest Resources Assessment 2015. Forest Ecology and Management, 352:9-20, 2015.
[6]
Henry M, Valentini R, Bernoux M. Soiul carbon stocks in ecoregions of Africa. Biogeosciences Discuss 6: 797-823, 2009.
[7]
Kenya National Bureau of Statistics. Republic of Kenya, 2009 Kenya population census P.25, 2010.
[8]
Jaetzold R, Schmidt H, Hornetz B and Shisanya C. Farm management Handbook of Kenya; Natural conditions and farm Management information, Part B- Central Kenya, Subpart B2. Central Province, 2nd editionVol. II, Ministry of Agriculture, p. 151-172; 188, 202, 222; 345-348; 352-371, 2006.
[9]
Republic of Kenya. Kiambu district Strategic Plan 2005-2010 for implementation of the national population policy for sustainable development. p 3, 2005a.
[10]
Okalebo J. K, Gathua K. W, Woomer Paul L. Laboratory methods of soil and plant analysis: A working manual, 2nd edition. Sacred office, Nairobi, Kenya p. 28 29; 42-44 and 78-80, 2002.
[11]
Oeba Vincent O, Larwanou Mahamane, Otor Samuel C. J, Kung’u James B, Muchiri N. Mbae. Growing common plantation tree species in Kenya for sale of carbon and wood supply: What is the best bet?. Southern forests 2017:1-8, 2017.
[12]
Oeba Vincent O, Larwanou Mahamane, Otor Samuel C. J, Kung’u James B, Muchiri N. Mbae. Estimation of aboveground and below ground carbon sequestration of Cupressus lusitanica, pinus patula and Eucalyptus Saligna plantation species in Kenya. Researchjournali’s Journal of Forestry: Vol. 3 No.6, 2016.
[13]
Masera O. R, Garza-Garligaris J. F, Kanninen M, Karjalainen T, Liski J, Nabuurs G. J, Punssinen A, de Jong B. H. J, Mohren, G. M. J. Modelling carbon sequestration in afforestation, agroforestry and forest management projects: the CO2FIX V.2 approach. Ecological Modelling 164 (2-3), 177-199, 2003.
[14]
Wellbrock Nicole, Gruneberg Erik, Riedel Thomas, Polley Heino. Carbon stocks in tree biomass and soils in German forests. Cent. Eur. For. J. 63: 105-112, 2017.
[15]
Yigin Yusuf, Panagos Panos. Assessment of soil organic carbon stocks under different future climate and land cover changes in Europe. Science of the Total Environment 557-558: 838-850, 2016.
[16]
Austin Amy T, Ballare Carlos L. Dual role of lignin in plant litter decomposition in terrestrial ecosystems. PNAS 107 (10): 4618-4622, 2010.
[17]
Demessie Ambachew, Singh Bal Ram, Lal Rattan, Strand line Tau. Leaf litter fall and litter decomposition under Eucalyptus and coniferous plantations in Gambo District, southern Ethiopia. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica Section B-Soil and Plan Science 62: 467-476, 2012.
[18]
Rahman Mahabubur Mohammed, Tsukamoto Jiro, Rahma, Md. Motiur, Yoneyama Aogu, Mostafa Kamal Mohammed. Lignin and its effects on litter decomposition in forest ecosystems. Chemistry and Ecology. DOI:10.1080/02757540.2013.790380, 2013.
[19]
Lemma B, Kleja D. B, Olsson M, Nilsson I. Factors controlling soil organic carbon sequestration under exotic tree plantations. A case study using the CO2Fix model in southwestern Ethiopia. Forest Ecology and Management Vol. 252: 124-131, 2007.
[20]
Palviainen M, Finer L, Laiho R, Shorohova E. K, Vanha-Majamaa I. Carbon and nitrogen release from decomposing Scots pine, Norway spruce and silver birch stumps. Forest Ecology and Management Vol. 259: 390-398, 2010.
[21]
Bardulis Andis, Lupikis Ainars, Stola Jelena. Carbon balance in forest mineral soils in lativia modelled with YASSO07 soil carbon model. Forestry and wood processing. Research for rural development Vol 1. DOI:10.22616/rrd.23.2017.004, 2017.
[22]
Kim M, Lee W-K, Kurz W. A, Kwak D-A, Morken S, Smyth. C. E, Ryu D. Estimating carbon dynamics in forest carbon pools under IPCC standards in South Korea using CBM-CFS3. iForest 10: 83-92. – doi: 10.3832/ifor2040-009, 2016.
[23]
Johnson K, Scatena F. N, Pan Y. Short and longterm responses of total soilm orgnic carbon to harvesting in northern hardwood forest. Forest Ecology and Management Vol. 259: 1262-1267, 2010.
[24]
Eaton J. M, Lawrence D. Loss of carbon sequestration potential after several decades of shifting cultivation in the Southern Yucatan. Forest Ecology and Management Vol. 258: 949-958, 2009.
[25]
Vicharnakorn Phutchard, Shrestha Rajendra P, Ngai Masahiko, Salam Abdul P, Kiratiprayoon Somboon. Carbon stock assessment using remore sensing and forest inventory data in Savannakhet, lao PDR. Remote Sens. 6: 5452-5479, 2014.
[26]
Ngo Kang Min, Turner L, Muller-Landau Helene C, Davies Stuart J, Larjavaara Markku, Hassan Nik Faizu bin Nik, Lum Shawn. Carbon stocks in primary and secondary tropical forests in Singapore. Forest Ecology and Management 296: 81-89, 2013.
[27]
Antibus R, Linkins III A. E. Effects of liming a red pine forest floor on mycorrhizal numbers and mycorrhizal and soil acid phosphatase activities. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, Vol. 24. No.5:479-487, 1992.
[28]
Kaumbutho P. G, Simalenga T. E (eds). Conservation tillage with animal traction. A resource book of the Animal Traction Network for Eastern and Southern Africa (ATNESA). Harare. Zimbabwe. 173p, 1999
[29]
Zhang, C. F., Meng, F.-R., Bhatti, J. S., Trofymow, J. A., Arp, Paul, A. (2008). Modeling forest litter decomposition and N mineralization in litterbags, placed across Canada: A 5-model comparison. Ecological Modelling Vol. 219:342-360, 2008.
[30]
Wamelink, G. W. W., van Dobben, H. F., Mol-Dijkstra, J. P., Schouwenberg, E. P. A. G., Kros, J., de Vries, W. Modelling impacts of changes in carbon dioxide concentration, climate and nitrogen deposition on carbon sequestration by European forests and forest soils. Forest Ecology and Management Vol. 258: 1794-1805, 2009.
[31]
Foster N. W, Morrison I. K. Carbon sequestration by a jack pine stand following urea application. Forest Ecology and Management Vol. 169: 45-52, 2002.
[32]
Vesterdal L, Ritter E, Gundersen P. Change in soil organic carbon following afforestation of former arable land. Forest Ecology and Management Vol. 169: 137-147, 2002.
[33]
Gachene, C. K. K. and Kimaru, G. Soil Fertility and Land Productivity - A guide for extension workers in the eastern Africa region. Technical Handbook No.30. Regional Land Management Unit (RELMA)/ Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida). ISBN: 9966-896-66-, 2003.
[34]
Hopmans P, Elms S. R. Changes in total carbon and nutrients in soil profiles and accumulation in biomass after a 30-year rotation of Pinus radiata on Polzolized sands: Impacts of intensive harvesting on soil resources. Forest Ecology and Management Vol. 258: 2183-2193, 2009.
Browse journals by subject