Quantifying Tree Diversity, Carbon Stocks, and Sequestration Potential for Diverse Land Uses in Northeast India

Abstract

In the modern era, rapid anthropogenic activities in the vicinity of the Himalayas disturb the carbon sequestration potential resulting in climate change. For the first time, this study estimates the biomass and carbon storage potential of Northeast India’s diverse land uses through a biomass estimation model developed for this region. The mean tree density in tropical, subtropical, and temperate forests was 539, 554, and 638 trees ha−1, respectively. The mean vegetation carbon stock was the highest for temperate forests (122.09 Mg C ha−1), followed by subtropical plantations (115.45 Mg C ha−1), subtropical forests (106.01 Mg C ha−1), tropical forests (105.33 Mg C ha−1), tropical plantations (93.00 Mg C ha−1), and temperate plantations (50.10 Mg C ha−1). Among the forests, the mean soil organic carbon (SOC) stock up to 45 cm depth was the highest for tropical forests (72.54 Mg C ha−1), followed by temperate forests (63.4 Mg C ha−1) and subtropical forests (42.58 Mg C ha−1). A strong relationship between the tree basal area and biomass carbon storage was found for all land-use types. The land-use transformation from agriculture to agroforestry, and grassland to plantations increased both vegetation carbon (VC) and SOC stocks. The corresponding increase in VC and SOC was 40.80 and 43.34 Mg C ha−1, respectively, in the former, and 83.18 and 97.64 Mg C ha−1 in the latter. In general, the landscape-level estimates were drawn from site-level estimates in a given land-use type, and therefore, the corresponding values might be overestimated. Nevertheless, the results provide baseline information on carbon stock which may serve as a reference for devising appropriate land-use change policies in the region.

Forest structure and carbon stock of Suan Phueng Nature Education Park in Ratchaburi Province, Western Thailand

“…The mean aboveground carbon stock was the highest for the LMF (312.38 ± 59.30 Mg C ha -1 ), followed by the DEF+MDF (91.71 ± 34.32 Mg C ha -1 ), and MDF (42.07 ± 20.62 Mg C ha -1 ). The differences in aboveground carbon stock were likely due to several factors including basal area, tree density, and DBH (Joshi and Dhyani 2019;García-Vega and Newbold 2020;Sahoo et al 2021), which all differed among the forest sites (Table 2). The mean soil carbon stock was also the highest for the LMF (181.36 ± 69.07 Mg C ha -1 ), followed by the DEF+MDF (112.12 ± 58.39 Mg C ha -1 ), and the ).…”

“…Yet, there was no significant difference between the three forests (Table 3). In general, soil carbon content is influenced by the accumulation of organic matter that is controlled by litter input and decomposition (Sahoo et al 2021). Evidence of burning can be observed in field surveying of two latter forests (LMF, DEF+MDF), while it did not exist in the LMF.…”

Tissue-cultured regeneration and ecological values in major bamboo species

“…The carbon sequestration of 10.94 mg/ha/ year was trapped by the Phyllostachys pubescens (Sujarwo 2016). The carbon assimilation of 9.89 mg/ha/year was sunk by Phyllostachys maikinoi in the forest of North-East India (Sahoo et al 2021b). The carbon stock of 13 mg/ha/ year was assimilated by the Phyllostachys bambusoi in the forest of Japan (Isagi et al 1997) and 8 mg/ha/year was assimilated by the Phyllostachys maikinoi in the Taiwan forests (Yen and Lee 2011).…”

Carbon Emissions With Forest Cover Change and Wood Harvest in the Dry Temperate Region of Pakistan Between 1908 and 2015

“…The carbon value of above and below-ground biomass was measured. For the above-ground biomass (ABG) carbon measurement, first stem biomass was measured from the growing stock volume and wood densities of the respective species (Haripriya, 2000;IPCC, 2006;Kumar et al, 2021;Sahoo et al, 2021). The stem biomass was then converted into total above-ground biomass using the biomass expansion factor (BEF) method proposed by IPPC, ( 2006).…”