| Literature DB >> 22545018 |
Abstract
A study was carried out to assess carbon emission and carbon loss caused from land use change (LUC) of converting a wasteland into a Jatropha curcas plantation. The study was conducted for 12 months at a newly established Jatropha curcas plantation in Port Dickson, Malaysia. Assessments of soil carbon dioxide (CO(2)) flux, changes of soil total carbon and plant biomass loss and growth were made on the wasteland and on the established plantation to determine the effects of land preparation (i.e., tilling) and removal of the wasteland's native vegetation. Overall soil CO(2) flux showed no significant difference (P < 0.05) between the two plots while no significant changes (P < 0.05) on soil total carbon at both plots were detected. It took 1.5 years for the growth of Jatropha curcas to recover the biomass carbon stock lost during land conversion. As far as the present study is concerned, converting wasteland to Jatropha curcas showed no adverse effects on the loss of carbon from soil and biomass and did not exacerbate soil respiration.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22545018 PMCID: PMC3322421 DOI: 10.1100/2012/405084
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ScientificWorldJournal ISSN: 1537-744X
Mean ± standard error of stem diameter, dry weight of the aboveground and belowground section of Jatropha curcas, and its moisture content at different ages.
| Age (month) | Stem diameter (cm) | DWAG (kg) | Moisture (%) | DWBG (kg) | Moisture (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 46 | 14.6 ± 1.0 | 7.72 ± 0.25 | 65.8 ± 0.5 | 3.17 ± 0.07 | 67.1 ± 0.2 |
| 32 | 12.5 ± 0.9 | 5.88 ± 0.58 | 68.4 ± 0.8 | 2.27 ± 0.05 | 64.7* |
| 24 | 9.3 ± 0.4 | 2.23 ± 0.21 | 70.7 ± 0.1 | 1.03 ± 0.37 | 67.2 ± 2.1 |
| 10 | 7.6 ± 0.0 | 0.45 ± 0.02 | 73.0 ± 0.6 | 0.47 ± 0.02 | 58.8* |
| <6 | 1.6 ± 0.2 | 0.02 ± 0.01 | n.a | 0.01 ± 0.00 | n.a |
DWAG: dry weight aboveground.
DWBG: dry weight belowground.
n.a: not applicable.
*: no replications were made for moisture content determination.
Figure 1Linear regression of the stem diameter and biomass dry weight of the aboveground and belowground sections of Jatropha curcas.
Mean carbon content of the different parts of Jatropha curcas.
| Plant part | Carbon content (%) |
|---|---|
| Aboveground | 45.60 |
| Belowground | 44.86 |
| Leaf | 46.46 |
Estimated monthly dry weight of biomass and litterfall of Jatropha curcas and mass of carbon stored in each respective part (mean ± standard error).
| Month | Year | Biomass dry weight | Carbon in biomass | Litterfall dry weight | Carbon in litterfall |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Mg ha−1) | (Mg ha−1) | ||||
| August | 2009 | 0.60 ± 0.38 | 0.27 ± 0.17 | 0.05 ± 0.02 | 0.03 ± 0.01 |
| September | 2009 | 0.83 ± 0.49 | 0.38 ± 0.22 | 0.03 ± 0.02 | 0.01 ± 0.01 |
| October | 2009 | 1.02 ± 0.48 | 0.46 ± 0.22 | 0.08 ± 0.05 | 0.04 ± 0.03 |
| November | 2009 | 1.04 ± 0.50 | 0.47 ± 0.23 | 0.11 ± 0.08 | 0.05 ± 0.04 |
| December | 2009 | 1.44 ± 0.69 | 0.65 ± 0.31 | 0.18 ± 0.09 | 0.08 ± 0.04 |
| January | 2010 | 1.64 ± 0.76 | 0.74 ± 0.34 | 0.08 ± 0.04 | 0.04 ± 0.02 |
| February | 2010 | 2.06 ± 0.98 | 0.93 ± 0.44 | 0.11 ± 0.03 | 0.05 ± 0.02 |
| March | 2010 | 2.42 ± 1.07 | 1.10 ± 0.48 | 0.05 ± 0.05 | 0.02 ± 0.02 |
| April | 2010 | 2.99 ± 1.53 | 1.18 ± 0.58 | 0.12 ± 0.09 | 0.06 ± 0.04 |
| May | 2010 | 3.69 ± 1.88 | 1.46 ± 0.73 | 0.12 ± 0.04 | 0.06 ± 0.02 |
| June | 2010 | 4.09 ± 1.82 | 1.86 ± 0.82 | 0.16 ± 0.07 | 0.08 ± 0.03 |
| July | 2010 | 4.68 ± 1.51 | 2.13 ± 0.68 | 0.22 ± 0.07 | 0.10 ± 0.03 |
|
| |||||
| Cumulated Total | 4.08 | 1.86 | 1.29 | 0.60 | |
Biomass dry weight of aboveground vegetation removed at plot S from five replications of 9 m2 quadrats.
| Quadrat (3 × 3 m) | Biomass dry weight (kg) |
|---|---|
| 1 | 2.30 |
| 2 | 1.05 |
| 3 | 3.85 |
| 4 | 1.45 |
| 5 | 2.80 |
|
| |
| Total | 11.45 |
Changes of soil carbon content at plot P and plot S.
| 2009 | 2010 | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||||||||
| Month | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul |
| Carbon (%) | ||||||||||||
| Plot S | 2.12 | 2.09 | 1.76 | 2.59 | 1.80 | 2.35 | 2.67 | 1.83 | 2.13 | 2.05 | 1.87 | 1.81 |
| Plot P | 1.63 | 2.20 | 1.94 | 1.16 | 1.35 | 1.42 | 1.62 | 1.56 | 1.74 | 1.80 | 1.66 | 1.75 |
Figure 2Mean soil flux at plot P and plot S. Months with a # sign indicates that there is a significant difference by t-test (P > 0.05).