3 research outputs found

    Land use change and forest management effects on soil carbon stocks in the Northeast U.S.

    Get PDF
    Abstract Background In most regions and ecosystems, soils are the largest terrestrial carbon pool. Their potential vulnerability to climate and land use change, management, and other drivers, along with soils’ ability to mitigate climate change through carbon sequestration, makes them important to carbon balance and management. To date, most studies of soil carbon management have been based at either large or site-specific scales, resulting in either broad generalizations or narrow conclusions, respectively. Advancing the science and practice of soil carbon management requires scientific progress at intermediate scales. Here, we conducted the fifth in a series of ecoregional assessments of the effects of land use change and forest management on soil carbon stocks, this time addressing the Northeast U.S. We used synthesis approaches including (1) meta-analysis of published literature, (2) soil survey and (3) national forest inventory databases to examine overall effects and underlying drivers of deforestation, reforestation, and forest harvesting on soil carbon stocks. The three complementary data sources allowed us to quantify direction, magnitude, and uncertainty in trends. Results Our meta-analysis findings revealed regionally consistent declines in soil carbon stocks due to deforestation, whether for agriculture or urban development. Conversely, reforestation led to significant increases in soil C stocks, with variation based on specific geographic factors. Forest harvesting showed no significant effect on soil carbon stocks, regardless of place-based or practice-specific factors. Observational soil survey and national forest inventory data generally supported meta-analytic harvest trends, and provided broader context by revealing the factors that act as baseline controls on soil carbon stocks in this ecoregion of carbon-dense soils. These factors include a range of soil physical, parent material, and topographic controls, with land use and climate factors also playing a role. Conclusions Forest harvesting has limited potential to alter forest soil C stocks in either direction, in contrast to the significant changes driven by land use shifts. These findings underscore the importance of understanding soil C changes at intermediate scales, and the need for an all-lands approach to managing soil carbon for climate change mitigation in the Northeast U.S

    Soil carbon in the South Atlantic United States: Land use change, forest management, and physiographic context

    No full text
    Evidence-based forest carbon (C) management requires identifying baseline patterns and drivers of soil organic carbon (SOC) stocks, and their responses to land use change and management, at scales relevant to landowners and resource professionals. The growth of datasets related to SOC, which is the largest terrestrial C pool, facilitates use of synthesis techniques to assess SOC stocks and changes at management-relevant scales. We report results from a synthesis using meta-analysis of published studies, as well as two large databases, in which we identify baseline patterns and drivers, quantify influences of land use change and forest management, and provide ecological context for distinct management regimes and their SOC impacts. We conducted this, the fourth in a series of ecoregional SOC assessments, for the South Atlantic States, which are disproportionately important to the national-scale forest C sink and forest products industry in the U.S. At the ecoregional level, baseline SOC stocks vary with climatic, topographic, and soil physical factors such as temperature and precipitation, slope gradient and aspect, and soil texture. Land use change and forest management modestly influence SOC stocks. Reforestation on previously cultivated lands increases SOC stocks, while deforestation for cultivation has the opposite effect; for continuously forested lands, harvesting is associated with SOC increases and prescribed fire with SOC declines. Effects of reforestation are large and positive for upper mineral soils (+30%) but not detectable in lower mineral soils. Negative effects of prescribed fire are due to significant C losses from organic horizons (-46%); fire and harvest have no impacts on upper mineral soils but both increase SOC in lower mineral soils (+8.2 and +46%, respectively, with high uncertainty in the latter). Inceptisols are generally more negatively impacted by prescribed fire or harvest than Ultisols, and covariance between inherent factors (including soil taxonomy) and management impacts indicates how interior vs. coastal physiographic sections differ in their management regimes and SOC trends. In the cooler, wetter, topographically rugged interior hardwood forests, which have larger baseline SOC stocks, prescribed fire and even light harvesting generally decrease SOC; in contrast, intensively managed coastal plain pine plantations begin with small initial SOC stocks, but exhibit rapid gains over even a single rotation. This covariance between place (physiography) and practice (management regime) suggests that distinct approaches to forest C management may be complementary to other ecological or production goals, when implemented as part of wider (e.g., state-level) forest C or climate policy
    corecore