Quantification of carbon capture in different soil uses

Geovanny Solarte-Guerrero, Dayana Marcela Males, Á. N. Ortiz
{"title":"Quantification of carbon capture in different soil uses","authors":"Geovanny Solarte-Guerrero, Dayana Marcela Males, Á. N. Ortiz","doi":"10.22267/RCIA.203701.127","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Carbon sequestration by soils in different production systems contributes greatly to the reduction of greenhouse gases. The objective of this study was to quantify the carbon stored in four land uses at different soil depths. To this end, a 22 factorial experiment in complete randomized block design (CRBD) was carried out. The factor A: land uses (natural pastures, shelterbelts, fodder banks, and potato crop) and the factor B: two soil depths (30 and 60cm), with three replications.  . As a result, statistical differences were found among soil uses (p>0.0573) and between depths of 30 and 60cm (p<0.0061). However, no statistically significant differences were found in the interaction land-use and depth (P > 0.0659). The fodder bank presented a higher organic carbon content (139.85tC.ha-1) at 60cm depth and the potato monoculture (63.32tC.ha-1) at 30cm depth while, at both depths, natural pasture reported lower values (54.45 and 60.02tC.ha-1). Hence, the importance of productive systems to accumulate more carbon at greater depths of soil (60cm) compared to lower depths (30cm), which may be linked to agricultural opperations made on the soi surface, generating carbon leakage.","PeriodicalId":211714,"journal":{"name":"Revista de Ciencias Agrícolas","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista de Ciencias Agrícolas","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22267/RCIA.203701.127","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Carbon sequestration by soils in different production systems contributes greatly to the reduction of greenhouse gases. The objective of this study was to quantify the carbon stored in four land uses at different soil depths. To this end, a 22 factorial experiment in complete randomized block design (CRBD) was carried out. The factor A: land uses (natural pastures, shelterbelts, fodder banks, and potato crop) and the factor B: two soil depths (30 and 60cm), with three replications.  . As a result, statistical differences were found among soil uses (p>0.0573) and between depths of 30 and 60cm (p<0.0061). However, no statistically significant differences were found in the interaction land-use and depth (P > 0.0659). The fodder bank presented a higher organic carbon content (139.85tC.ha-1) at 60cm depth and the potato monoculture (63.32tC.ha-1) at 30cm depth while, at both depths, natural pasture reported lower values (54.45 and 60.02tC.ha-1). Hence, the importance of productive systems to accumulate more carbon at greater depths of soil (60cm) compared to lower depths (30cm), which may be linked to agricultural opperations made on the soi surface, generating carbon leakage.
不同土壤利用中碳捕获的量化
不同生产系统中土壤的固碳作用对减少温室气体有很大贡献。本研究的目的是量化四种土地利用方式在不同土壤深度下的碳储量。为此,采用完全随机区组设计(CRBD)进行22因子试验。因子A:土地利用(天然牧场、防护林、饲料库和马铃薯作物),因子B:两个土壤深度(30和60厘米),有三个重复。结果表明,不同土壤利用方式(p>0.0573)和30 ~ 60cm深度(p 0.0659)之间存在统计学差异。饲料库在60cm深度有机碳含量最高(139.85tC.ha-1),马铃薯单作在30cm深度有机碳含量最高(63.32tC.ha-1),而天然牧草在这两个深度有机碳含量均较低(54.45和60.02tC.ha-1)。因此,与较低深度(30厘米)相比,生产系统在更深的土壤深度(60厘米)积累更多碳的重要性,这可能与在土壤表面进行的农业操作有关,从而产生碳泄漏。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信