Does &amp;lt;i&amp;gt;Juncus effusus&amp;lt;/i&amp;gt; enhance methane emissions from grazed pastures on peat?

Henneberg, Anders; Elsgaard, Lars; Sorrell, Brian K.; Brix, Hans; Petersen, Søren O.

doi:10.5194/bgd-12-8467-2015

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As discussed earlier, vascular plants can play an important role in transporting CH 4 from soils to the atmosphere through aerenchyma (Couwenberg & Fritz, ; Henneberg, Elsgaard, Sorrell, Brix, & Petersen, ). The establishment of vascular vegetation following extraction is generally more extensive on cutover fens than on cutover bogs (Graf, Rochefort, & Poulin, ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emissions of methane from northern peatlands: a review of management impacts and implications for future management options

Abdalla

Hastings

Truu

et al. 2016

Ecology and Evolution

162

139

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Northern peatlands constitute a significant source of atmospheric methane (CH 4). However, management of undisturbed peatlands, as well as the restoration of disturbed peatlands, will alter the exchange of CH 4 with the atmosphere. The aim of this systematic review and meta‐analysis was to collate and analyze published studies to improve our understanding of the factors that control CH 4 emissions and the impacts of management on the gas flux from northern (latitude 40° to 70°N) peatlands. The analysis includes a total of 87 studies reporting measurements of CH 4 emissions taken at 186 sites covering different countries, peatland types, and management systems. Results show that CH 4 emissions from natural northern peatlands are highly variable with a 95% CI of 7.6–15.7 g C m−2 year−1 for the mean and 3.3–6.3 g C m−2 year−1 for the median. The overall annual average (mean ± SD) is 12 ± 21 g C m−2 year−1 with the highest emissions from fen ecosystems. Methane emissions from natural peatlands are mainly controlled by water table (WT) depth, plant community composition, and soil pH. Although mean annual air temperature is not a good predictor of CH 4 emissions by itself, the interaction between temperature, plant community cover, WT depth, and soil pH is important. According to short‐term forecasts of climate change, these complex interactions will be the main determinant of CH 4 emissions from northern peatlands. Drainage significantly (p < .05) reduces CH 4 emissions to the atmosphere, on average by 84%. Restoration of drained peatlands by rewetting or vegetation/rewetting increases CH 4 emissions on average by 46% compared to the original premanagement CH 4 fluxes. However, to fully evaluate the net effect of management practice on the greenhouse gas balance from high latitude peatlands, both net ecosystem exchange (NEE) and carbon exports need to be considered.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emissions of methane from northern peatlands: a review of management impacts and implications for future management options

Abdalla

Hastings

Truu

et al. 2016

Ecology and Evolution

162

139

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Plant functional groups differ in their ability to transport CH 4 with graminoids exhibiting greater internal CH 4 transport than forbs (Bhullar et al, ). At our study site, Juncus effusus (Juncus), a graminoid, is more dominant in improved/grazed wetlands than seminative wetlands (Boughton, Quintana‐ascencio, & Bohlen, ; Ervin & Wetzel, ; Gathumbi et al, ; Tweel & Bohlen, ) and is known to transport CH 4 through plant‐mediated transport directly from the production site to the atmosphere (Dalal et al, ; Henneberg et al, ; Henneberg et al, ; Petersen et al, ; Ström et al, ). While juncus is dominant in the improved and grazed wetlands, it is neither clear which species it may be replacing nor whether it can explain the higher CH 4 emissions from these wetlands.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Management on Methane Emissions From Subtropical Wetlands Embedded in Agricultural Ecosystems

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wetlands are an important source of CH4 globally. However, uncertainty surrounding the impact of anthropogenic activities on CH4 emissions from wetlands limits understanding of how these ecosystems will respond to management changes. Furthermore, by neglecting the potential for management to influence CH4 emissions likely inflates error of CH4 emissions for regional and global CH4 models. This study employed a replicated factorial experimental design to investigate how management of the agricultural landscape, including grazing and/or management intensity, influences net CH4 emissions from embedded, seasonal subtropical wetlands. This research further determined key mechanisms by which management decisions at the landscape scale modulate CH4 emissions from the embedded wetlands. Net CH4 exchange was measured using a closed chamber system over two complete wet/dry seasonal cycles in 16 wetlands embedded in either agronomically improved pastures (improved wetlands) or less intensively grazed unfertilized seminative pastures (seminative wetlands), as well as in grazed and ungrazed wetlands in each treatment. Emissions of CH4 were higher from improved wetlands (2.82 μmol m−2 s−1) than seminative wetlands (0.75 μmol m−2 s−1), particularly during the wet season. Enhanced CH4 emissions in improved wetlands relative to seminative wetlands were caused by increased soil wetness and by higher biomass in improved seminative wetlands. Unlike subtropical flooded pastures, our results showed that grazers do not alter CH4 emissions from subtropical wetlands. Current and future changes in management intensity of pastures may cause shifts in net soil CH4 emissions from embedded subtropical wetlands, which could further enhance this emission source.

show abstract

“…Another special feature of rush biomass is its physical structure. Rush tillers are characterised by aerenchyma which allow gas diffusion through the tissues [51]. This property could, even in chopped condition, have an influence on certain utilisation processes such as the oxygen supply during combustion or the methane removal during anaerobic fermentation.…”

Section: General Features Of Rush Biomass As An Energy Substratementioning

confidence: 99%

The energy potential of soft rush (Juncus effusus L.) in different conversion routes

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Rushes are prominent wetland plants that are well adapted to conditions of waterlogging. Tall rushes like soft rush (Juncus effusus L.) tend to dominate the vegetation and offer a great biomass potential. Removing rush biomass is often necessary to enhance various ecosystem services of wetlands. There is an urgent need for sustainable use of the removed biomass apart from expensive composting ore useless landfill. Methods: We investigated three alternative energy utilisation routes for soft rush biomass and evaluated their energetic potential: biomethanisation via wet fermentation technique (a), biomethanisation via solid-state fermentation technique (b) and combustion (c). Batch experiments (a), experimental fermenters (b), and thermocalorimetric equipment (c) were used to measure energy output per unit rush biomass input. Results: The wet fermentation technique had significantly higher biogas yields than solid-state fermentation (399 L N kg −1 oDM compared to 258 L N kg −1 oDM). These yields constitute 59 and 43%, respectively, of the biogas potential of maize silage as a reference. Solid-state fermentation technique needs longer retention time compared to wet co-digestion to earn comparable methane yields. Soft rush biomass shows high heating values (15.06 MJ kg FM w15 −1) compared to other herbaceous solid fuels. Conclusions: Low costs for substrate production make energetic utilisation of Juncus effusus an interesting alternative, if short distances between fields and biomass conversion plant can be realised. All investigated conversion routes appear promising, provided that the substrate specifics are considered in the design of the conversion technique. Besides the size of the rush dominated area and the distribution of these areas in the landscape, the investment costs and the subsidies for the conversion plant play a pivotal role in the selection of the preferred conversion path.

show abstract

Does <i>Juncus effusus</i> enhance methane emissions from grazed pastures on peat?

Cited by 3 publications

References 36 publications

Emissions of methane from northern peatlands: a review of management impacts and implications for future management options

Emissions of methane from northern peatlands: a review of management impacts and implications for future management options

The Role of Management on Methane Emissions From Subtropical Wetlands Embedded in Agricultural Ecosystems

The energy potential of soft rush (Juncus effusus L.) in different conversion routes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About