管理土壤碳固存:评估瑞典耕地上中间作物、作物残茬清除和沼渣施用的效果

IF 5.9 3区 工程技术 Q1 AGRONOMY
Sergio Alejandro Barrios Latorre, Lovisa Björnsson, Thomas Prade
{"title":"管理土壤碳固存:评估瑞典耕地上中间作物、作物残茬清除和沼渣施用的效果","authors":"Sergio Alejandro Barrios Latorre,&nbsp;Lovisa Björnsson,&nbsp;Thomas Prade","doi":"10.1111/gcbb.70010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Promoting the bioeconomy to aid in the achievement of sustainability goals has increased demand for biomass as feedstock. Residual biomass from agricultural production is an attractive option, as it is a by-product that does not compete with food production. However, crop residues are important for the preservation of soil quality, especially for the maintenance of soil organic carbon. Therefore, their use can conflict with environmental goals and initiatives that aim to preserve soil fertility and carbon stocks. Nevertheless, the adoption of intermediate crops could compensate for the negative effects of crop residue removal. Moreover, if crop residues are used for a bioeconomy pathway such as biogas production, the resulting digestate derived from the anaerobic digestion process could be returned to the soil, providing an input of highly recalcitrant carbon. In this study, we modeled the effects of removal of crop residues, the cultivation of intermediate crops, and the application of digestate on Swedish soil organic carbon stocks. Our results suggest that the inclusion of intermediate crops could raise the carbon stocks at equilibrium by an average of 1.93 t C ha<sup>−1</sup> (~3% increase) with a notable spatial variation. Digestate application showed a higher average increase (3.3 t C ha<sup>−1</sup>, ~5%) with an even higher variation. The removal of crop residues was detrimental in some areas, resulting in a loss of carbon, which could not be compensated for entirely by the introduction of intermediate crops or digestate recycling. Combining these two practices showed overall positive effects on soil organic carbon stocks; however, the results cannot be generalized at any spatial location, and we emphasize the importance of assessments tailored to local conditions.</p>","PeriodicalId":55126,"journal":{"name":"Global Change Biology Bioenergy","volume":"16 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/gcbb.70010","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Managing Soil Carbon Sequestration: Assessing the Effects of Intermediate Crops, Crop Residue Removal, and Digestate Application on Swedish Arable Land\",\"authors\":\"Sergio Alejandro Barrios Latorre,&nbsp;Lovisa Björnsson,&nbsp;Thomas Prade\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/gcbb.70010\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Promoting the bioeconomy to aid in the achievement of sustainability goals has increased demand for biomass as feedstock. Residual biomass from agricultural production is an attractive option, as it is a by-product that does not compete with food production. However, crop residues are important for the preservation of soil quality, especially for the maintenance of soil organic carbon. Therefore, their use can conflict with environmental goals and initiatives that aim to preserve soil fertility and carbon stocks. Nevertheless, the adoption of intermediate crops could compensate for the negative effects of crop residue removal. Moreover, if crop residues are used for a bioeconomy pathway such as biogas production, the resulting digestate derived from the anaerobic digestion process could be returned to the soil, providing an input of highly recalcitrant carbon. In this study, we modeled the effects of removal of crop residues, the cultivation of intermediate crops, and the application of digestate on Swedish soil organic carbon stocks. Our results suggest that the inclusion of intermediate crops could raise the carbon stocks at equilibrium by an average of 1.93 t C ha<sup>−1</sup> (~3% increase) with a notable spatial variation. Digestate application showed a higher average increase (3.3 t C ha<sup>−1</sup>, ~5%) with an even higher variation. The removal of crop residues was detrimental in some areas, resulting in a loss of carbon, which could not be compensated for entirely by the introduction of intermediate crops or digestate recycling. Combining these two practices showed overall positive effects on soil organic carbon stocks; however, the results cannot be generalized at any spatial location, and we emphasize the importance of assessments tailored to local conditions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55126,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Change Biology Bioenergy\",\"volume\":\"16 12\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/gcbb.70010\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Change Biology Bioenergy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gcbb.70010\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRONOMY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Change Biology Bioenergy","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gcbb.70010","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

摘要

促进生物经济以帮助实现可持续发展目标,增加了对生物质原料的需求。来自农业生产的残留生物质是一种有吸引力的选择,因为它是一种不会与粮食生产竞争的副产品。然而,作物残留物对保持土壤质量,尤其是保持土壤有机碳非常重要。因此,使用作物残茬可能与旨在保护土壤肥力和碳储量的环境目标和倡议相冲突。不过,采用中间作物可以弥补清除作物残茬的负面影响。此外,如果作物秸秆被用于生物经济途径,如沼气生产,那么厌氧发酵过程中产生的沼渣可以返回土壤,提供高分解性碳的输入。在这项研究中,我们模拟了清除作物残茬、种植中间作物和施用沼渣对瑞典土壤有机碳储量的影响。结果表明,种植中间作物可使平衡状态下的碳储量平均增加 1.93 吨碳/公顷(约增加 3%),但空间差异明显。施用沼渣的平均增幅更高(3.3 吨碳/公顷-1,约 5%),但差异更大。清除作物残茬在某些地区是有害的,会造成碳的损失,而引入中间作物或沼渣循环利用并不能完全弥补碳的损失。将这两种做法结合起来,对土壤有机碳储量总体上产生了积极影响;但是,这些结果不能在任何空间位置进行推广,我们强调根据当地条件进行评估的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Managing Soil Carbon Sequestration: Assessing the Effects of Intermediate Crops, Crop Residue Removal, and Digestate Application on Swedish Arable Land

Managing Soil Carbon Sequestration: Assessing the Effects of Intermediate Crops, Crop Residue Removal, and Digestate Application on Swedish Arable Land

Promoting the bioeconomy to aid in the achievement of sustainability goals has increased demand for biomass as feedstock. Residual biomass from agricultural production is an attractive option, as it is a by-product that does not compete with food production. However, crop residues are important for the preservation of soil quality, especially for the maintenance of soil organic carbon. Therefore, their use can conflict with environmental goals and initiatives that aim to preserve soil fertility and carbon stocks. Nevertheless, the adoption of intermediate crops could compensate for the negative effects of crop residue removal. Moreover, if crop residues are used for a bioeconomy pathway such as biogas production, the resulting digestate derived from the anaerobic digestion process could be returned to the soil, providing an input of highly recalcitrant carbon. In this study, we modeled the effects of removal of crop residues, the cultivation of intermediate crops, and the application of digestate on Swedish soil organic carbon stocks. Our results suggest that the inclusion of intermediate crops could raise the carbon stocks at equilibrium by an average of 1.93 t C ha−1 (~3% increase) with a notable spatial variation. Digestate application showed a higher average increase (3.3 t C ha−1, ~5%) with an even higher variation. The removal of crop residues was detrimental in some areas, resulting in a loss of carbon, which could not be compensated for entirely by the introduction of intermediate crops or digestate recycling. Combining these two practices showed overall positive effects on soil organic carbon stocks; however, the results cannot be generalized at any spatial location, and we emphasize the importance of assessments tailored to local conditions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Global Change Biology Bioenergy
Global Change Biology Bioenergy AGRONOMY-ENERGY & FUELS
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
7.10%
发文量
96
审稿时长
1.5 months
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.
×
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