| Literature DB >> 27340428 |
Askia M Mohammed1, James S Robinson2, David Midmore2, Anne Verhoef2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The recent inclusion of the cocoa sector as an option for carbon storage necessitates the need to quantify the C stocks in cocoa systems of Ghana.Entities:
Keywords: Carbon stocks; Cocoa ecosystem; Shaded and unshaded cocoa systems
Year: 2016 PMID: 27340428 PMCID: PMC4877416 DOI: 10.1186/s13021-016-0045-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Carbon Balance Manag ISSN: 1750-0680
Grand mean ± standard error of selected properties of the soils in the cocoa ecosystems for region (n = 24), system (n = 24) and depth (n = 16)
| Factor | Treatment | Bulk density (Mg/m3) | Clay | Sand | Silt | Moisture | C |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (%) | |||||||
| Region | Eastern | 1.5 ± 0.1 | 8.3 ± 0.6 | 51 ± 2 | 40 ± 1 | 14.7 ± 0.7 | 0.7 ± 0.1 |
| Western | 1.6 ± 0.1 | 11.7 ± 0.6 | 52 ± 2 | 38 ± 1 | 14.7 ± 0.7 | 1.5 ± 0.1 | |
| System | Shaded | 1.6 ± 0.1 | 10.5 ± 0.6 | 53 ± 2 | 36 ± 1 | 14.8 ± 0.7 | 1.0 ± 0.1 |
| Unshaded | 1.5 ± 0.1 | 9.6 ± 0.6 | 49 ± 2 | 41 ± 1 | 14.7 ± 0.7 | 1.3 ± 0.1 | |
| Soil depth | 0–20 cm | 1.1 ± 0.1 | 6.6 ± 0.7 | 53 ± 2 | 41 ± 1 | 17.9 ± 0.8 | 2.0 ± 0.1 |
| 20–40 cm | 1.6 ± 0.1 | 9.9 ± 0.7 | 51 ± 2 | 39 ± 1 | 12.6 ± 0.8 | 0.8 ± 0.1 | |
| 40–60 cm | 1.9 ± 0.1 | 13.6 ± 0.7 | 50 ± 2 | 37 ± 1 | 13.7 ± 0.8 | 0.6 ± 0.1 | |
Age of farms appearing as covariate
Fig. 1Percentage carbon in cocoa ecosystem components (n = 5). Persea americana and Newbouldia laevis are dominant shade trees in Western and Eastern regions, respectively. Error bars represent standard errors
Mean C stocks ± standard error (Mg/ha) in cocoa trees, shade trees, stumps and litter components as influenced by region [Eastern (E), Western (W)] and system [shaded (S), unshaded (U)] and their interactions, (n = 12)
| Factor | Treatment | Cocoa | Shade | Stumps | Litter |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Region | E | 15.2 ± 1.0 | 10.2 ± 6.4 | 0.16 ± 0.02 | 2.3 ± 0.2 |
| W | 13.5 ± 1.0 | 16.4 ± 6.4 | 0.12 ± 0.02 | 2.4 ± 0.2 | |
| System | S | 12.7 ± 1.1 | 13.3 ± 4.1 | 0.07 ± 0.02 | 2.6 ± 0.2 |
| U | 16.1 ± 1.1 | n.a. | 0.21 ± 0.02 | 2.2 ± 0.2 | |
| Region * System | E * S | 13.6 ± 1.5 | 10.2 ± 6.4 | 0.12 ± 0.03 | 2.3 ± 0.2 |
| E * U | 16.9 ± 1.5 | n.a. | 0.19 ± 0.03 | 2.4 ± 0.2 | |
| W * S | 11.8 ± 1.6 | 16.4 ± 6.4 | 0.01 ± 0.03 | 2.9 ± 0.2 | |
| W * U | 15.2 ± 1.5 | n.a. | 0.24 ± 0.03 | 1.9 ± 0.2 |
Age of farms appearing as covariate in the statistical model used
Not applicable
Pearson correlation coefficients (r) for linear relationships among biomass C components in cocoa ecosystems
| Ecosystem | Cocoa | Shade | Stumps | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cocoa | 0.4936 | |||
| Shade |
| 0.2801 | ||
| Stump | −0.1842 | 0.2948 | −0.2536 | |
| Litter | 0.4945 | 0.5397 | 0.3703 | −0.4871 |
Values with ‘**’ are significant at P < 0.01, and without symbol are not significant, (2—tailed test)
Mean soil organic C stocks ± standard error (Mg/ha) at 0–20, 20–40 and 40–60 cm layers as influenced by region [Eastern (E), Western (W)], and system [shaded (S), unshaded (U)], (n = 12)
| Factor | Treatment | 0–20 cm | 20–40 cm | 40–60 cm |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Region | E | 40.2 ± 3.4 | 16.6 ± 3.6 | 14.3 ± 1.6 |
| W | 58.4 ± 3.4 | 33.3 ± 3.6 | 25.7 ± 1.6 | |
| System | S | 45.4 ± 3.4 | 19.0 ± 3.6 | 18.5 ± 1.6 |
| U | 53.2 ± 3.4 | 30.9 ± 3.6 | 21.4 ± 1.6 | |
| Region * System | E * S | 44.7 ± 4.8 | 18.2 ± 5.0 | 17.1 ± 2.2 |
| E * U | 35.7 ± 4.8 | 15.0 ± 5.0 | 11.5 ± 2.2 | |
| W * S | 46.1 ± 5.1 | 19.9 ± 5.4 | 20.0 ± 2.4 | |
| W * U | 70.7 ± 4.8 | 46.7 ± 5.1 | 31.3 ± 2.2 |
Age of farms appearing as covariate in the statistical model used
Mean cocoa ecosystem carbon stocks ± standard error, distributed between the biomass and soil (0–60 cm depth) components according to region [Eastern (E), Western (W)], and system [shaded (S), unshaded (U)], (n = 12)
| Factor | Treatment | Biomass C (Mg/ha) | Soil C (Mg/ha) | Total C (Mg/ha) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Region | E | 25.2 ± 1.6 | 70.5 ± 5.4 | 95.7 ± 8.6 |
| W | 18.4 ± 1.6 | 113.0 ± 5.4 | 137.7 ± 8.6 | |
| System | S | 25.8 ± 1.6 | 83.7 ± 5.5 | 115.5 ± 8.6 |
| U | 17.8 ± 1.6 | 99.8 ± 5.5 | 117.9 ± 8.6 | |
| Region * System | E * S | 31.3 ± 2.2 | 79.3 ± 7.7 | 109.5 ± 12.0 |
| E * U | 19.0 ± 2.2 | 61.7 ± 7.7 | 81.8 ± 12.0 | |
| W * S | 20.2 ± 2.3 | 88.1 ± 8.2 | 121.5 ± 12.0 | |
| W * U | 16.7 ± 2.2 | 137.8 ± 7.7 | 153.9 ± 12.1 |
Age of farms appearing as covariate in the statistical model used
Fig. 2The C stocks dynamics in cocoa ecosystems (lines) with time as affected by cocoa systems (scatter) in the Eastern and Western regions of Ghana
Fig. 3The position of Suhum and Sefwi-Wiawso where the cocoa farms were selected for the study: vegetation zones are based upon Taylor [33]. The vegetation zones of the Gold Coast, Accra