Trade-offs between soil water storage and carbon sequestration: Differences between natural secondary forests and plantation forests on the Loess Plateau

IF 4.1 2区环境科学与生态学 Q1 ECOLOGY

Ecological Engineering Pub Date : 2025-08-25 DOI:10.1016/j.ecoleng.2025.107779

Xiaoyu Liang , Zhongbao Xin , Zhiqiang Zhang

{"title":"Trade-offs between soil water storage and carbon sequestration: Differences between natural secondary forests and plantation forests on the Loess Plateau","authors":"Xiaoyu Liang , Zhongbao Xin , Zhiqiang Zhang","doi":"10.1016/j.ecoleng.2025.107779","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Afforestation is a Nature-Based Solutions (NbS) and has been considered as an active management of land degradation processes in Loess Plateau based on specific restoration measures. Excessive water consumption for carbon sequestration can result in an unsustainable forest ecosystem in water-limited areas. This study examined three ecological restoration patterns—natural secondary forests, artificial ecological forests, and artificial economic forests—and analyzed the trade-offs and benefits between soil water consumption and carbon sequestration at a depth of 4 m. In addition, this study focuses on the deep carbon-water relationship under different ecological restoration pattern. The results showed that natural secondary forests exhibited higher carbon sequestration and lower water consumption compared to plantations. At a 4-m soil depth, the soil water storage (SWS) of natural secondary forests was the highest (552.41 ± 36.29 mm), significantly higher than that of artificial ecological forests (448.21 ± 53.33 mm) and artificial economic forests (444.38 ± 30.02 mm) (<em>P</em> < 0.05). Similarly, the soil organic carbon density (SOCD) of natural secondary forests was the highest (19.59 ± 4.14 kg m<sup>−2</sup>), nearly double that of plantations. The deep layer (100–400 cm) SOCD across all ecological restoration patterns accounted for 43 % to 69 % (55.2 ± 8.2 %) of the total profile, demonstrating substantial carbon sequestration potential. Moreover, the RMSD value of deep layer SWS and SOCD in natural secondary forest was significantly lower than that in plantations, indicating a more coordinated carbon-water relationship in natural secondary forests. Compared to pure artificial forests, mixed plantation forests enhanced carbon sequestration by 34.46 % to 122.47 % while maintaining soil water without excessive depletion. To promote large-scale NbS such as afforestation, natural secondary forests should be prioritized in vegetation restoration. In addition, the sustainable management of plantations (Adopting mixed measures) is an important strategy.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11490,"journal":{"name":"Ecological Engineering","volume":"221 ","pages":"Article 107779"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecological Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925857425002691","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Afforestation is a Nature-Based Solutions (NbS) and has been considered as an active management of land degradation processes in Loess Plateau based on specific restoration measures. Excessive water consumption for carbon sequestration can result in an unsustainable forest ecosystem in water-limited areas. This study examined three ecological restoration patterns—natural secondary forests, artificial ecological forests, and artificial economic forests—and analyzed the trade-offs and benefits between soil water consumption and carbon sequestration at a depth of 4 m. In addition, this study focuses on the deep carbon-water relationship under different ecological restoration pattern. The results showed that natural secondary forests exhibited higher carbon sequestration and lower water consumption compared to plantations. At a 4-m soil depth, the soil water storage (SWS) of natural secondary forests was the highest (552.41 ± 36.29 mm), significantly higher than that of artificial ecological forests (448.21 ± 53.33 mm) and artificial economic forests (444.38 ± 30.02 mm) (P < 0.05). Similarly, the soil organic carbon density (SOCD) of natural secondary forests was the highest (19.59 ± 4.14 kg m⁻²), nearly double that of plantations. The deep layer (100–400 cm) SOCD across all ecological restoration patterns accounted for 43 % to 69 % (55.2 ± 8.2 %) of the total profile, demonstrating substantial carbon sequestration potential. Moreover, the RMSD value of deep layer SWS and SOCD in natural secondary forest was significantly lower than that in plantations, indicating a more coordinated carbon-water relationship in natural secondary forests. Compared to pure artificial forests, mixed plantation forests enhanced carbon sequestration by 34.46 % to 122.47 % while maintaining soil water without excessive depletion. To promote large-scale NbS such as afforestation, natural secondary forests should be prioritized in vegetation restoration. In addition, the sustainable management of plantations (Adopting mixed measures) is an important strategy.

查看原文本刊更多论文

土壤储水与固碳的权衡：黄土高原天然次生林与人工林的差异

植树造林是一种基于自然的解决方案（NbS），被认为是黄土高原基于特定恢复措施的土地退化过程的积极管理。在水资源有限的地区，为固碳而消耗过多的水可能导致不可持续的森林生态系统。本研究考察了天然次生林、人工生态林和人工经济林三种生态恢复模式，并分析了4 m深度土壤水分消耗与碳固存之间的权衡与效益。此外，本文还重点研究了不同生态恢复模式下的深层碳水关系。结果表明：天然次生林比人工林具有更高的固碳能力和更低的耗水能力；在4 m土壤深度，天然次生林土壤储水量最高（552.41±36.29 mm），显著高于人工生态林（448.21±53.33 mm）和人工经济林（444.38±30.02 mm）（P < 0.05）。天然次生林土壤有机碳密度（SOCD）最高，为19.59±4.14 kg m−2，是人工林的近2倍。在所有生态恢复模式中，深层（100-400 cm） SOCD占总剖面的43% ~ 69%(55.2±8.2%)，显示出巨大的固碳潜力。此外，天然次生林深层SWS和SOCD的RMSD值显著低于人工林，表明天然次生林的碳水关系更为协调。与纯人工林相比，混交林在保持土壤水分不过度枯竭的情况下，固碳能力提高34.46% ~ 122.47%。要推进大规模的植树造林等生态系统建设，植被恢复应以天然次生林为主。此外，人工林的可持续管理（采取混合措施）是一项重要的战略。

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

Ecological Engineering 环境科学-工程：环境

CiteScore

8.00

自引率

5.30%

发文量

293

审稿时长

57 days

期刊介绍： Ecological engineering has been defined as the design of ecosystems for the mutual benefit of humans and nature. The journal is meant for ecologists who, because of their research interests or occupation, are involved in designing, monitoring, or restoring ecosystems, and can serve as a bridge between ecologists and engineers. Specific topics covered in the journal include: habitat reconstruction; ecotechnology; synthetic ecology; bioengineering; restoration ecology; ecology conservation; ecosystem rehabilitation; stream and river restoration; reclamation ecology; non-renewable resource conservation. Descriptions of specific applications of ecological engineering are acceptable only when situated within context of adding novelty to current research and emphasizing ecosystem restoration. We do not accept purely descriptive reports on ecosystem structures (such as vegetation surveys), purely physical assessment of materials that can be used for ecological restoration, small-model studies carried out in the laboratory or greenhouse with artificial (waste)water or crop studies, or case studies on conventional wastewater treatment and eutrophication that do not offer an ecosystem restoration approach within the paper.