2016
DOI: 10.1007/s10113-016-1008-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Seeing the forest not for the carbon: why concentrating on land-use-induced carbon stock changes of soils in Brazil can be climate-unfriendly

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 78 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…On the basis of SOC stock investigations, Boy et al (2018) found that the impact from land use change on SOC stocks was much smaller than initially expected. However, SOC stock change may be higher in subsoils than in topsoils, which emphases the need to properly account for subsoil C when evaluating the potential for C gains and losses under LUC.…”
Section: Inter-and Transdisciplinary Research Approachmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…On the basis of SOC stock investigations, Boy et al (2018) found that the impact from land use change on SOC stocks was much smaller than initially expected. However, SOC stock change may be higher in subsoils than in topsoils, which emphases the need to properly account for subsoil C when evaluating the potential for C gains and losses under LUC.…”
Section: Inter-and Transdisciplinary Research Approachmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…This increase was accompanied by a rise in the weight of carbon losses in the BR-163 when compared to the BLA of 7.9-9.9% for the same period. While it is yet unclear whether post-deforestation management practices can enhance carbon soil storage (Boy et al 2016), we show that deforestation itself is a relevant source of carbon, and that land-related mitigation strategies should focus mainly on forest losses prevention. Still, adequate land management holds great importance by restraining demand for additional land, improving livelihoods, having a positive impact on aboveground carbon stocks conservation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 75%
“…For this reason, we could not restrict our discussion to natural ecosystems and patterns associated to land-use change had to be considered to some extent. Although the data for vegetation and soil C pools were not obtained in the same timeframe, it is expected that latter is much less sensitive to land-use change than the former (Boy et al, 2018). Based on the data obtained for MAT, MAP, EEM, vegetation and soil C pools, we obtained Pearson's correlation coefficients among these variables for each biome (Amazon, Caatinga, Cerrado, Atlantic Forest, Pampa, and Pantanal) as shown in table 1.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%