• 中国中文核心期刊
  • 中国科学引文数据库(CSCD)核心库来源期刊
  • 中国科技论文统计源期刊(CJCR)
  • 第二届国家期刊奖提名奖

Citation:

Effects of Harvesting on Soil Organic Carbon Storage of Boreal Larix gmelinii-Carex schmidtii Wetlands in Daxing'anling

  • Received Date: 2012-08-28
  • This paper compared the changes of soil bulk density, soil organic carbon concentration and soil organic carbon storage five years after harvesting with different intensities, i.e. unharvesting (the control), low-intensity selective cutting (25%), moderate-intensity selective cutting (35%) and heavy-intensity selective cutting (50%) and revealed the influence of harvesting intensity on soil organic carbon storage of Larix gmelinii-Carex schmidtii wetlands in Daxing'anling. The key results are as follows: (1) the soil bulk density did not differ significantly at the low-intensity selective cutting sites (0.22±0.06~1.17±0.22 g·cm-3), and increased significantly at the moderate-intensity selective cutting (0.55±0.23~1.58±0.07 g·cm-3) and heavy-intensity selective cutting (0.49±0.24~1.47±0.08 g·cm-3) sites, compared with that at control (0.31±0.09~1.18±0.13 g·cm-3) sites (28.0%~137.0% or 19.7%~98.1%) (P-1) led to a significant increase of soil organic carbon concentration (53.8% 126.7%) in the surface and deep layer, however, the moderate-intensity selective cutting (1.52±1.32~62.70±54.33 g·kg-1) and heavy-intensity selective cutting (7.91±5.59~102.59±67.49 g·kg-1) significantly reduced the soil organic carbon concentration in each layer (62.0%~89.0%) or the middle-upper part layer (37.8%~85.0%) (P-2) resulted in a significant increase of soil organic carbon storage (90.7%~128.8%) in the deep layers, while moderate-intensity selective cutting (0.25±0.12~4.65±3.52 kg·m-2) and heavy-intensity selective cutting (1.14±0.79~4.42±1.64 kg·m-2) declined significantly the soil organic carbon storage in the lower-middle part (76.4%~83.0%) or the middle part layer (56.8%) (P-2) or a significant decrease by 48.5% and 30.1% at the moderate-intensity selective cutting (9.01±5.90 kg·m-2) and heavy-intensity selective cutting (12.22±4.25 kg·m-2) sites, respectively, compared with the unharvested stand (17.49±3.71 kg·m-2) (PLarix gmelinii-Carex schmidtii wetlands from the carbon sequestration point of view.
  • 加载中
  • [1]

    Houghton J T, Maccarthy J J, Metz B, et al. Climate Change 2001: Contribution of Working Group II to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Impacts, Adaption, and Vulnerability[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001
    [2]

    Maltby E, Immirzi P. Carbon dynamics in peatlands and other wetland soils regional and global perspectives[J]. Chemosphere, 1993, 27 (6): 999-1023
    [3]

    Alongi D M, Trott L A, Pfitzner J. Deposition, mineralization, and storage of carbon and nitrogen in sediments of the far northern and northern Great Barrier Reef shelf[J]. Continental Shelf Research, 2007, 27(20): 2595-2622
    [4]

    Whalen S C. Biogeochemistry of methane exchange between natural wetlands and the atmosphere[J]. Environmental Engineering Science, 2005, 22(1): 73-94
    [5]

    Carroll P, Crill P. Carbon balance of a temperate poor fen[J]. Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 1997, 11(3): 349-356
    [6]

    Wagner G H, Wolf D C. Carbon transformations and soil organic matter formation. Principles and Applications of Soil Microbiology[M]. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1999
    [7]

    Bridgham S D, Megonigal J P, Keller J K, et al. The carbon balance of North American wetlands[J]. Wetlands, 2006, 26(4): 889-916
    [8]

    Kaunisto S. Peatland forestry in Finland: problems and possibilities from the nutritional point of view. Northern forested wetlands: Ecology and management[M]. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 1997
    [9]

    Trettin C C, Gale M R, Jurgensen M F, et al. Carbon storage response to harvesting and site preparation in a forested mire in northern Michigan, USA[J]. Suo,1992, 43(4-5): 281-284
    [10]

    Trettin C C, Jurgensen M F, Gale M R, et al. Recovery of carbon and nutrient pools in a northern forested wetland 11 years after harvesting and site preparation[J]. Forest Ecology and Management, 2011, 262(9): 1826-1833
    [11]

    Laiho R, Sanchez F, Tiarks A, et al. Impacts of intensive forestry on early rotation trends in site carbon pools in the southeastern US[J]. Forest Ecology and Management, 2003, 174(1-3): 177-189
    [12] 牟长城,吴云霞,李婉姝,等. 采伐对小兴安岭落叶松-泥炭藓沼泽温室气体排放的影响[J].应用生态学报,2010,21(2):287-293

    [13] 孙晓新,牟长城,宋长春,等. 采伐对小兴安岭森林沼泽甲烷通量的影响[J]. 土壤通报,2011,42(1):190-194

    [14]

    Carter M R. Soil Sampling and Methods of Analysis[M]. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 1993
    [15] 杨金艳,王传宽. 东北东部森林生态系统土壤碳贮量和碳通量[J]. 生态学报,2005,25 (11):83-90

    [16]

    Martiarena R A, Frangi J L, Pinazo M A, et al. Effect of thinning and harvest type on storage and losses of phosphorous in Pinus taeda L. Plantations in Subtropical Argentina[J]. International Journal of Forestry Research, 2011, 76:15-32
    [17]

    Fisher R F, Binkley D, Pritchett W L. Ecology and Management of Forest Soils[M]. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 2000
    [18]

    Garten C T, Post W M, Hanson P J, et al. Forest soil carbon inventories and dynamics along an elevation gradient in the southern Appalachian Mountains[J]. Biogeochemistry, 1999, 45(2): 115-145
    [19]

    Bouwman L A, Arts W. Effects of soil compaction on the relationships between nematodes, grass production and soil physical properties[J]. Applied Soil Ecology, 2000, 14(3): 213-222
    [20]

    Johnson D W. Effects of forest management on soil carbon storage[J]. Water, Air, & Soil Pollution, 1992, 64(1): 83-120
    [21]

    Trettin C C. Silvicultural effects on functional processes of a boreal wetland [D]. Raleigh: North Carolina State University, 1992
    [22]

    Yanai R D, Currie W S, Goodale C L. Soil carbon dynamics after forest harvest: an ecosystem paradigm reconsidered[J]. Ecosystems, 2003, 6(3): 197-212
    [23]

    Ryan D F, Huntington T G, Wayne Martin C. Redistribution of soil nitrogen, carbon and organic matter by mechanical disturbance during whole-tree harvesting in northern hardwoods[J]. Forest Ecology and Management, 1992, 49(1-2): 87-99
    [24]

    Hendrick R L, Pregitzer K S. Temporal and depth-related patterns of fine root dynamics in northern hardwood forests[J]. Journal of Ecology, 1996, 84(2): 167-176
    [25]

    Mclaughlin J W. Carbon assessment in Boreal Wetlands of Ontario[M]. Canada: Ontario Forest Research Institute, 2004
    [26]

    Jiang H, Apps M J, Peng C, et al. Modelling the influence of harvesting on Chinese boreal forest carbon dynamics[J]. Forest Ecology and Management, 2002, 169(1-2): 65-82
    [27]

    Powers R F, Frazer D W, Mccoll J G. Soil nitrogen mineralization in a clearcutting chronosequence in a northern California conifer forest[J]. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 1990, 54(4): 1145-1152
    [28]

    De Neve S, Hofman G. Influence of soil compaction on carbon and nitrogen mineralization of soil organic matter and crop residues[J]. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 2000, 30(5-6): 544-549
    [29]

    Nilsen P, Strand L T. Thinning intensity effects on carbon and nitrogen stores and fluxes in a Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) stand after 33 years[J]. Forest Ecology and Management, 2008, 256(3): 201-208
  • 加载中
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Article views(3207) PDF downloads(1374) Cited by()

Proportional views

Effects of Harvesting on Soil Organic Carbon Storage of Boreal Larix gmelinii-Carex schmidtii Wetlands in Daxing'anling

  • 1. Center for Ecological Research, Northeast Forestry University, Harbin 150040, Heilongjiang, China

Abstract: This paper compared the changes of soil bulk density, soil organic carbon concentration and soil organic carbon storage five years after harvesting with different intensities, i.e. unharvesting (the control), low-intensity selective cutting (25%), moderate-intensity selective cutting (35%) and heavy-intensity selective cutting (50%) and revealed the influence of harvesting intensity on soil organic carbon storage of Larix gmelinii-Carex schmidtii wetlands in Daxing'anling. The key results are as follows: (1) the soil bulk density did not differ significantly at the low-intensity selective cutting sites (0.22±0.06~1.17±0.22 g·cm-3), and increased significantly at the moderate-intensity selective cutting (0.55±0.23~1.58±0.07 g·cm-3) and heavy-intensity selective cutting (0.49±0.24~1.47±0.08 g·cm-3) sites, compared with that at control (0.31±0.09~1.18±0.13 g·cm-3) sites (28.0%~137.0% or 19.7%~98.1%) (P-1) led to a significant increase of soil organic carbon concentration (53.8% 126.7%) in the surface and deep layer, however, the moderate-intensity selective cutting (1.52±1.32~62.70±54.33 g·kg-1) and heavy-intensity selective cutting (7.91±5.59~102.59±67.49 g·kg-1) significantly reduced the soil organic carbon concentration in each layer (62.0%~89.0%) or the middle-upper part layer (37.8%~85.0%) (P-2) resulted in a significant increase of soil organic carbon storage (90.7%~128.8%) in the deep layers, while moderate-intensity selective cutting (0.25±0.12~4.65±3.52 kg·m-2) and heavy-intensity selective cutting (1.14±0.79~4.42±1.64 kg·m-2) declined significantly the soil organic carbon storage in the lower-middle part (76.4%~83.0%) or the middle part layer (56.8%) (P-2) or a significant decrease by 48.5% and 30.1% at the moderate-intensity selective cutting (9.01±5.90 kg·m-2) and heavy-intensity selective cutting (12.22±4.25 kg·m-2) sites, respectively, compared with the unharvested stand (17.49±3.71 kg·m-2) (PLarix gmelinii-Carex schmidtii wetlands from the carbon sequestration point of view.

Reference (29)

Catalog

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return