气候变化背景下农林复合系统碳汇功能研究进展

农林复合系统作为一种土地综合利用体系,可以有效吸收和固定CO₂、增加碳储量,在达到收获目的的同时,可有力减轻温室效应.农林复合系统对CO₂的调控作用,使人们认识到农林复合系统较单一作物系统有着明显优势,因此,深入了解不同农林复合系统的碳汇功能及其影响因素,对全球碳循环研究及碳收支准确评估具有重要意义.本文综述了农林复合系统的概念与分类,探讨了农林复合系统不同组分的碳固存潜力及其影响因子,得出不同区域、不同类型农林复合系统内植被的固碳速率相差很大(0.59～11.08 t C·hm^-2·a^-1),其主要受到气候因子和农林复合系统自身特性(物种组成、林木密度和林龄)的影响.农林复合系统内土壤的固碳潜力受到系统内树木和非树木成分输入的生物量多少和质量、土壤质地、土壤结构的影响.不同地区的任何一个农林复合系统的碳储量多少主要依赖于复合系统中各组分的结构和功能.针对目前的研究现状,指出应重点加强农林复合系统优化结构的碳汇功能研究,以及加强农林复合系统碳储量的时空分布格局及其固碳机制的长期研究.     

草地土壤固碳潜力研究进展

土壤固碳功能和固碳潜力已成为全球气候变化和陆地生态系统研究的重点。草地土壤有机碳库,作为陆地土壤有机碳库的重要组成部分,其较小幅度的波动,将会影响整个陆地生态系统碳循环,进而影响全球气候变化。因此,深入研究草地土壤固碳功能和固碳潜力对于适应和减缓气候变化具有重要意义。在土壤固碳潜力相关概念界定基础上,结合《2006年IPCC国家温室气体清单指南》,从样点及区域尺度上综述了目前关于草地土壤固碳潜力的一般估算方法,同时对各类方法的特点及适用性进行了评述,提出了草地生态系统固碳潜力研究概念模型。最后在对草地土壤固碳的影响因素及固碳措施总结的基础上,阐明了草地土壤有机碳固定研究中存在的问题和发展前景。     

城市土壤碳循环与碳固持研究综述

城市化过程带来的土地利用变化和环境污染是全球变化的重要方面,城市为人们了解人类与自然复合生态系统对全球变化的影响及其对全球变化的响应过程提供一个独特的"天然实验室"。陆地生态系统碳循环是全球变化研究的热点领域之一,然而,人们对城市在全球碳循环中的作用和影响知之甚少,城市土壤碳循环研究处于起步阶段。介绍了城市土壤的主要特性和碳循环特征,指出强烈的人为作用是其最突出的特点;综述了城市土壤碳库、碳通量和碳固持研究方面取得的进展;探讨了城市化过程中土地利用变化、土壤中生物及土壤管护措施、城市小气候、大气污染沉降和土壤污染等对土壤碳循环的影响;提出未来城市碳循环研究需要开展长期系统监测、深化城市土壤碳循环机制研究、创新研究范式和研究方法、并将研究成果与城市景观规划与设计相结合,提升城市土壤碳管理能力。     

农田土壤固碳措施的温室气体泄漏和净减排潜力

农田土壤固碳措施作为京都议定书认可的大气CO2减排途径受到了广泛关注.研究表明,农田土壤固碳措施在主要农业国家和全球都具有很大的固碳潜力.但是,实施农田土壤固碳措施有可能影响农业中化石燃料消耗和其他农业投入的CO2排放和非CO2温室气体排放.这些土壤碳库以外的温室气体排放变化可能抵消部分甚至全部土壤固碳效果,构成了农田土壤固碳措施的温室气体泄漏.因此,将土壤固碳和温室气体泄漏综合计算的净减排潜力成为了判定土壤固碳措施可行性的首要标准.综述总结了目前较受重视的一些农田措施(包括施用化学氮肥、免耕和保护性耕作、灌溉、秸秆还田、施用禽畜粪便以及污灌)的土壤固碳潜力,温室气体泄漏和净减排潜力研究成果.结果表明,温室气体泄漏可抵消以上措施土壤固碳效益的-241%～660%.建议在今后的研究中,应该关注土壤碳饱和、气候变化及土地利用变化对农田固碳措施温室气体泄漏和净减排潜力的评估结果的影响.     

基于森林清查资料的江西和浙江森林植被固碳潜力

以我国江西、浙江两省的森林植被为研究对象,基于1999-2003年间第六次全国森林清查数据及收集的1030个亚热带森林样地文献资料,依据林分生长的经验方程,估算了两个地区森林2004-2013年的固碳潜力,并基于455个样点的调查数据研究了不同森林管理措施(纯林间种、间伐、施肥)对森林未来固碳潜力的影响.结果表明:第六次森林清查以来的10年(2004-2013)间,江西森林植被年均自然固碳潜力约11.37 Tg C·a-1(1Tg=1012g),而浙江省森林植被年均自然固碳潜力约4.34 Tg C·a-1.纯林间种对江西、浙江两省森林植被固碳潜力影响最大,其次为间伐抚育,施肥的影响最小,纯林间种、间伐和施肥3种森林管理措施使江西省森林植被固碳潜力分别提高(6.54±3.9)、(3.81±2.02)和(2.35±0.6) Tg C·a-1,浙江省森林植被固碳潜力分别提高(2.64±1.28)、(1.42±0.69)和(1.15±0.29) Tg C·a-1.     

中国农田土壤生态系统固碳现状和潜力

研究在搜集和整理全国典型农业长期定位实验站数据的基础上,通过自建经验公式估算了不同管理措施下我国农田土壤的固碳能力和潜力.通过施用化肥、秸秆还田、施用有机肥和免耕措施,目前对我国农田土壤碳增加的贡献分别为40.51、23.89、35.83 Tg·a-1和1.17 Tg·a-1,合计为101.4 Tg·a-1,是我国目前能源活动碳总排放量的13.3%.通过情景分析发现,提高化肥施用量、秸秆还田量、有机肥施用量和推广免耕,可以使我国农田土壤的固碳量分别提高到94.91、42.23、41.38 Tg·a-1和3.58 Tg·a-1,合计为182.1Tg·a-1.农田土壤总的固碳潜力相当于目前我国能源活动碳排放量的23.9%,对于全球CO2减排具有重要的作用.     

中国森林土壤碳储量与土壤碳过程研究进展

森林是陆地生态系统的主体,是陆地上最大的碳储库和碳吸收汇。国内外研究表明,土壤亚系统在调节森林生态系统碳循环和减缓全球气候变化中起着重要作用。但是,由于森林类型的多样性、结构的复杂性以及森林对干扰和变化环境响应的时空动态变化,至今对森林土壤碳储量和变率的科学估算,以及土壤关键碳过程及其稳定性维持机制的认识还十分有限。综述了近十几年来我国森林土壤碳储量和土壤碳过程的研究工作,主要包括不同森林类型土壤碳储量、土壤碳化学稳定性、土壤呼吸及其组分、土壤呼吸影响机制、气候变化与土地利用对土壤碳过程的影响等;评述了土壤碳过程相关科学问题的研究进展,讨论了尚未解决的主要问题,并分析了未来土壤碳研究的发展趋势,以期为促进我国森林土壤碳循环研究,科学评价森林土壤碳固持潜力及其稳定性维持机制和有效实施森林生态系统管理提供科学参考。     

亚热带果园土壤固碳潜力估算——以永春县为例

为了解亚热带果园土壤的固碳潜力, 比较分析了永春县果园土壤有机碳含量在1982 年到2010 年的变化, 并估算了现有经营条件下亚热带果园土壤的固碳潜力。结果表明, 近28 年来, 永春县果园表层土壤有机碳含量总体呈上升的趋势;不同气候区域的土壤有机碳年均变幅为南亚热带气候区 > 过渡带 > 中亚热带气候区。有机碳年均变幅与初始有机碳含量的相关分析表明, 永春县果园土壤有机碳潜在储存能力估计值为13.74~21.05 g kg^-1。按照2010 年的土地利用方式、耕作措施、施肥水平和气候条件, 永春县果园土壤的固碳潜力为64108.77 t。这些有助于认识和评价我国果园土壤碳汇能力和固碳潜力。     

湖南省杉木人工林生态系统碳储量分配格局及固碳潜力

人工林生态系统碳储量的空间分配格局对全球陆地碳循环有重要的影响,但湖南省杉木人工林生态系统碳储量的分配格局并不清楚。本研究在湖南省样地野外调查的基础上,结合第八次全国森林资源清查的结果,计算出湖南省杉木人工林生态系统的碳储量空间分布格局。结果表明:杉木人工林生态系统碳密度随着林龄增加而增加,幼龄林、中龄林和成熟林分别为125.70、138.57、193.72 Mg·hm~(-2);其中,幼龄林、中龄林和成熟林的植被生物量碳密度分别为18.72、38.86、62.48 Mg·hm~(-2);土壤碳密度随着林分发育先降低后增加,幼龄林为105.49 Mg·hm~(-2)、中龄林为97.23 Mg·hm~(-2)、成熟林126.7 Mg·hm~(-2);湖南省杉木人工林生态系统碳储量为307.48 Tg,其中幼龄林为90.57 Tg,中龄林为91.87 Tg,成熟林为125.31 Tg;湖南省杉木人工林生态系统的固碳潜力为85.56 Tg,其中,植被固碳潜力为47.19 Tg,土壤的固碳潜力为34.82 Tg。确定杉木人工林固碳潜力有助于量化人工林对碳汇的贡献及其制定实现潜力的森林经营管理措施。     

煤矿废弃地生态修复的土壤有机碳效应

采煤使得植被和土壤遭到损毁破坏,导致原生态系统碳汇功能的急剧退化甚至完全丧失。采煤堆积的煤矸石可发生氧化自燃,是巨大的CO_2排放源。生态修复对减少矿区碳排放及减缓大气温室效应具有重要意义。分析了国内外煤矿废弃地生态修复后的土壤有机碳动态特征,修复模式、修复时间和修复措施对土壤有机碳及其活性组分的影响,总结了土壤固碳的主要影响因子。研究结果表明,土壤有机碳在人工植被修复和有机物添加后增加显著,且与修复时间成正比。煤矿废弃地通过采取适宜的生态修复措施,有很大的土壤固碳潜力。未来应加强团聚体固碳等土壤固碳机理和土壤活性有机碳等科学问题的研究,以期为退化区生态修复进程中土壤固碳功能提升提供参考。     

Ethiopian agriculture has greater potential for carbon sequestration than previously estimated

More than half of the cultivation‐induced carbon loss from agricultural soils could be restored through improved management. To incentivise carbon sequestration, the potential of improved practices needs to be verified. To date, there is sparse empirical evidence of carbon sequestration through improved practices in East‐Africa. Here, we show that agroforestry and restrained grazing had a greater stock of soil carbon than their bordering pair‐matched controls, but the difference was less obvious with terracing. The controls were treeless cultivated fields for agroforestry, on slopes not terraced for terracing, and permanent pasture for restrained grazing, representing traditionally managed agricultural practices dominant in the case regions. The gain by the improved management depended on the carbon stocks in the control plots. Agroforestry for 6–20 years led to 11.4 Mg ha^?1 and restrained grazing for 6–17 years to 9.6 Mg ha^?1 greater median soil carbon stock compared with the traditional management. The empirical estimates are higher than previous process‐model‐based estimates and indicate that Ethiopian agriculture has greater potential to sequester carbon in soil than previously estimated.     

Responses of soil carbon sequestration to climate‐smart agriculture practices: A meta‐analysis

Climate‐smart agriculture (CSA) management practices (e.g., conservation tillage, cover crops, and biochar applications) have been widely adopted to enhance soil organic carbon (SOC) sequestration and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions while ensuring crop productivity. However, current measurements regarding the influences of CSA management practices on SOC sequestration diverge widely, making it difficult to derive conclusions about individual and combined CSA management effects and bringing large uncertainties in quantifying the potential of the agricultural sector to mitigate climate change. We conducted a meta‐analysis of 3,049 paired measurements from 417 peer‐reviewed articles to examine the effects of three common CSA management practices on SOC sequestration as well as the environmental controlling factors. We found that, on average, biochar applications represented the most effective approach for increasing SOC content (39%), followed by cover crops (6%) and conservation tillage (5%). Further analysis suggested that the effects of CSA management practices were more pronounced in areas with relatively warmer climates or lower nitrogen fertilizer inputs. Our meta‐analysis demonstrated that, through adopting CSA practices, cropland could be an improved carbon sink. We also highlight the importance of considering local environmental factors (e.g., climate and soil conditions and their combination with other management practices) in identifying appropriate CSA practices for mitigating greenhouse gas emissions while ensuring crop productivity.     

Agroforestry and Biodiversity Conservation – Traditional Practices, Present Dynamics, and Lessons for the Future

The environmental services that agroforestry practices can provide, and especially their potential contribution to the conservation of biodiversity, have only recently attracted wider attention among agroforestry and conservation scientists. This new view is consistent with the ecosystem approach to natural resource management advocated by the Convention on Biological Diversity. This collection of six papers, which is based on a Workshop held in June–July 2004, brings together studies of biodiversity impacts of traditional agroforestry practices from Central and South America, Africa and Asia. The contributions highlight the considerable potential of traditional agroforestry practices to support biodiversity conservation, but also show their limits. These include the importance of sufficient areas of natural habitat and of appropriate hunting regulations for maintaining high levels of biodiversity in agroforestry land use mosaics, as well as the critical role of markets for tree products and of a favourable policy environment for agroforestry land uses. In combination the case studies suggest that maintaining diversity in approaches to management of agroforestry systems, along with a pragmatic, undogmatic view on natural resource management, will provide the widest range of options for adapting to changing land use conditions.     

A renewed perspective on agroforestry concepts and classification

Agroforestry, the association of trees with farming practices, is progressively becoming a recognized land-use discipline. However, it is still perceived by some scientists, technicians and farmers as a sort of environmental fashion which does not deserve credit. The peculiar history of agroforestry and the complex relationships between agriculture and forestry explain some misunderstandings about the concepts and classification of agroforestry and reveal that, contrarily to common perception, agroforestry is closer to agriculture than to forestry. Based on field experience from several countries, a structural classification of agroforestry into six simple categories is proposed: crops under tree cover, agroforests, agroforestry in a linear arrangement, animal agroforestry, sequential agroforestry and minor agroforestry techniques. It is argued that this pragmatic classification encompasses all major agroforestry associations and allows simultaneous agroforestry to be clearly differentiated from sequential agroforestry, two categories showing contrasting ecological tree-crop interactions. It can also contribute to a betterment of the image of agroforestry and lead to a simplification of its definition.     

Environmental and socioeconomic assessment of agroforestry implementation in Iran

Agroforestry has been recognized as a sustainable strategy over conventional agriculture that can mitigate environmental impacts, enhance ecosystem services, maintain natural resources, and simultaneously improve smallholders’ livelihoods in rural areas. Agroforestry will be most effective in agricultural lands that are more vulnerable in terms of environmental and socioeconomic aspects. Therefore, it is necessary to identify the priority areas that are more susceptible to agroforestry. The objective of this study was to evaluate where and to what extent Iran's farmlands were subjected to increased environmental and socioeconomic pressures that can be alleviated through the implementation of agroforestry practices. To do so, two climatic, four soil, and four socioeconomic indicators were selected, and their maps were generated as well. Then, pressure maps of these indicators were created by applying the critical threshold of each indicator to the corresponding map. Finally, all the pressure maps were accumulated on a map called the Agroforestry Suitability Map (ASM). The locations that have more than five pressures on the current map were designated as priority areas for the development of agroforestry. The main findings showed that rise in temperature and soil organic carbon (SOC) deficit were the dominant pressures that affected the study area. Furthermore, about 17% of the total farmlands were recognized as the priority areas. The priority areas were mostly located in arid and semi-arid regions, which indicates the greater vulnerability of these regions to climatic and socioeconomic conditions. Our results highlighted that the farmlands of Kermanshah, Khuzestan, and Lorestan provinces, located adjacent to the Zagros Mountains, are the most suited areas for agroforestry implementation, respectively. The study findings could assist decision makers in mitigating the negative effects of environmental pressures and in providing a wide range of other beneficial services through the establishment of agroforestry systems in the recognized priority areas.     

土地利用变化对区域碳源汇的影响研究进展

土地利用变化对陆地生态系统碳循环有着重要的影响,既可能成为碳源,也可能是碳汇。在国内外相关研究的基础上,综述了土地利用变化对全球及区域尺度上森林、草地和农业生态系统碳循环的影响。全球范围内,森林砍伐后向草地和农田的转化发挥碳源的作用,在毁林碳排放中占主导地位,其中热带地区森林转变为农田和草场的碳排放均高于温带和北方森林。另一方面,土地利用变化可促进森林的碳贮存,如退耕还林、改善森林管理等。各区域森林生态系统通过土地利用变化贮存碳的潜力存在显著差别,热带湿润和半湿润地区具有较大的碳汇潜力,而干旱地区减少碳排放的空间相对较少。开垦活动是影响草地生态系统碳储存最主要的人类活动,草地转变为农田伴随着土壤碳的流失。森林或草场转变为农田的过程伴随着植被和土壤碳储量的减少,生态系统碳储量降低,因此它是一个碳排放的过程。伴随着城市的扩张,农田向建设用地的转化也是一个碳排放的过程。当前评估土地利用变化影响的研究方法主要有遥感观测和遥感模型、统计估算、生态系统模型以及土地利用与生态系统模型的耦合。研究方法得到不断地完善和改进的同时,还存在着一些不确定性,因此需要建立统一的观测统计方法,降低数据中的不确定性;完善土地利用与生态系统模型的耦合研究;建立多尺度土地利用变化及生态系统综合技术方法体系;开展碳减排目标下土地利用最优化布局研究。     

Characterising the biophysical,economic and social impacts of soil carbon sequestration as a greenhouse gas removal technology

To limit warming to well below 2°C, most scenario projections rely on greenhouse gas removal technologies (GGRTs); one such GGRT uses soil carbon sequestration (SCS) in agricultural land. In addition to their role in mitigating climate change, SCS practices play a role in delivering agroecosystem resilience, climate change adaptability and food security. Environmental heterogeneity and differences in agricultural practices challenge the practical implementation of SCS, and our analysis addresses the associated knowledge gap. Previous assessments have focused on global potentials, but there is a need among policymakers to operationalise SCS. Here, we assess a range of practices already proposed to deliver SCS, and distil these into a subset of specific measures. We provide a multidisciplinary summary of the barriers and potential incentives towards practical implementation of these measures. First, we identify specific practices with potential for both a positive impact on SCS at farm level and an uptake rate compatible with global impact. These focus on: (a) optimising crop primary productivity (e.g. nutrient optimisation, pH management, irrigation); (b) reducing soil disturbance and managing soil physical properties (e.g. improved rotations, minimum till); (c) minimising deliberate removal of C or lateral transport via erosion processes (e.g. support measures, bare fallow reduction); (d) addition of C produced outside the system (e.g. organic manure amendments, biochar addition); (e) provision of additional C inputs within the cropping system (e.g. agroforestry, cover cropping). We then consider economic and non‐cost barriers and incentives for land managers implementing these measures, along with the potential externalised impacts of implementation. This offers a framework and reference point for holistic assessment of the impacts of SCS. Finally, we summarise and discuss the ability of extant scientific approaches to quantify the technical potential and externalities of SCS measures, and the barriers and incentives to their implementation in global agricultural systems.