Nuria Gomez-Casanovas, Elena Blanc-Betes, Carl J. Bernacchi, Elizabeth H. Boughton, Wendy Yang, Caitlin Moore, Taylor L. Pederson, Amartya Saha, Evan H. DeLucia
{"title":"Impact of Sugarcane Cultivation on C Cycling in Southeastern United States Following Conversion From Grazed Pastures","authors":"Nuria Gomez-Casanovas, Elena Blanc-Betes, Carl J. Bernacchi, Elizabeth H. Boughton, Wendy Yang, Caitlin Moore, Taylor L. Pederson, Amartya Saha, Evan H. DeLucia","doi":"10.1111/gcbb.70003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The expansion of sugarcane, a tropical high-yielding feedstock, will likely reshape the Southeastern United States (SE US) bioenergy landscape. However, the sustainability of sugarcane, particularly as it displaces grazed pastures, is highly uncertain. Here, we investigated how pasture conversion to sugarcane in subtropical Florida impacts net ecosystem CO<sub>2</sub> exchange (NEE) and net ecosystem carbon (C) balance (NECB). Measurements were made over three full growth cycles (> 3 years) in sugarcane—plant cane, PC; first ratoon cane, FRC; second ratoon cane, SRC—and in improved (IM) and semi-native (SN) pastures, which make up ca. 37% of agricultural land in the region. Immediately following conversion, PC was a stronger net source of CO<sub>2</sub> than pastures, indicating the importance of CO<sub>2</sub> losses related to land disturbance. Sugarcane, however, shifted to a strong net sink of CO<sub>2</sub> after first regrowth, and overall sugarcane was a stronger net CO<sub>2</sub> sink than pastures. Both stand age and low water availability during cane emergence and tillering substantially decreased its potential gross CO<sub>2</sub> uptake. Accounting for all C gains and removals (i.e., NECB), greater frequency of burn events and repeated harvest increased removals and overall made sugarcane a stronger C source relative to pastures despite substantial C inputs from the previous land use and a stronger CO<sub>2</sub> sink strength. Time since conversion substantially reduced C losses from sugarcane, and the NECB of SRC was similar to that of IM pasture but lower than that of SN pasture, indicating a rapid shift in the NECB of cane. We conclude that the C-balance implications following conversion will depend on the proportion of IM versus SN pastures converted to sugarcane. Furthermore, our findings suggest that no-burn harvest management strategies will be critical to the development of a sustainable bioenergy landscape in SE US.</p>","PeriodicalId":55126,"journal":{"name":"Global Change Biology Bioenergy","volume":"16 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/gcbb.70003","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Change Biology Bioenergy","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gcbb.70003","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRONOMY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The expansion of sugarcane, a tropical high-yielding feedstock, will likely reshape the Southeastern United States (SE US) bioenergy landscape. However, the sustainability of sugarcane, particularly as it displaces grazed pastures, is highly uncertain. Here, we investigated how pasture conversion to sugarcane in subtropical Florida impacts net ecosystem CO2 exchange (NEE) and net ecosystem carbon (C) balance (NECB). Measurements were made over three full growth cycles (> 3 years) in sugarcane—plant cane, PC; first ratoon cane, FRC; second ratoon cane, SRC—and in improved (IM) and semi-native (SN) pastures, which make up ca. 37% of agricultural land in the region. Immediately following conversion, PC was a stronger net source of CO2 than pastures, indicating the importance of CO2 losses related to land disturbance. Sugarcane, however, shifted to a strong net sink of CO2 after first regrowth, and overall sugarcane was a stronger net CO2 sink than pastures. Both stand age and low water availability during cane emergence and tillering substantially decreased its potential gross CO2 uptake. Accounting for all C gains and removals (i.e., NECB), greater frequency of burn events and repeated harvest increased removals and overall made sugarcane a stronger C source relative to pastures despite substantial C inputs from the previous land use and a stronger CO2 sink strength. Time since conversion substantially reduced C losses from sugarcane, and the NECB of SRC was similar to that of IM pasture but lower than that of SN pasture, indicating a rapid shift in the NECB of cane. We conclude that the C-balance implications following conversion will depend on the proportion of IM versus SN pastures converted to sugarcane. Furthermore, our findings suggest that no-burn harvest management strategies will be critical to the development of a sustainable bioenergy landscape in SE US.
期刊介绍:
GCB Bioenergy is an international journal publishing original research papers, review articles and commentaries that promote understanding of the interface between biological and environmental sciences and the production of fuels directly from plants, algae and waste. The scope of the journal extends to areas outside of biology to policy forum, socioeconomic analyses, technoeconomic analyses and systems analysis. Papers do not need a global change component for consideration for publication, it is viewed as implicit that most bioenergy will be beneficial in avoiding at least a part of the fossil fuel energy that would otherwise be used.
Key areas covered by the journal:
Bioenergy feedstock and bio-oil production: energy crops and algae their management,, genomics, genetic improvements, planting, harvesting, storage, transportation, integrated logistics, production modeling, composition and its modification, pests, diseases and weeds of feedstocks. Manuscripts concerning alternative energy based on biological mimicry are also encouraged (e.g. artificial photosynthesis).
Biological Residues/Co-products: from agricultural production, forestry and plantations (stover, sugar, bio-plastics, etc.), algae processing industries, and municipal sources (MSW).
Bioenergy and the Environment: ecosystem services, carbon mitigation, land use change, life cycle assessment, energy and greenhouse gas balances, water use, water quality, assessment of sustainability, and biodiversity issues.
Bioenergy Socioeconomics: examining the economic viability or social acceptability of crops, crops systems and their processing, including genetically modified organisms [GMOs], health impacts of bioenergy systems.
Bioenergy Policy: legislative developments affecting biofuels and bioenergy.
Bioenergy Systems Analysis: examining biological developments in a whole systems context.