| Literature DB >> 31361769 |
Uttam Kumar Sahoo1, Soibam Lanabir Singh1,2, Anudip Gogoi1, Alice Kenye1, Snehasudha S Sahoo3.
Abstract
Soil organic carbon plays an important role in the stability and fertility of soil and is influenced by different management practice. We quantified active and passive carbon pools from total soil organic carbon (TOC) in seven different land use systems of northeast India. TOC was highest (2.75%) in natural forest and lowest in grassland (1.31%) and it decreased with increasing depth in different pools of lability. Very Labile Carbon (VLC) fraction ranged from 36.11 to 42.74% of TOC across different land use system. Active carbon (AC) pool was highest in Wet Rice Cultivation (61.64%) and lowest (58.71%) in natural forest. Higher AC pools (VLC and less labile) in most land use systems barring natural forests suggest that the land use systems in the region are vulnerable to land use change and must adopt suitable management practice to harness carbon sequestration.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31361769 PMCID: PMC6667142 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0219969
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Soil characteristics and management practices of different land uses.
| Land uses | Age (year) | Soil pH range | Dominant species | Management practices |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Forest | 41 | 4.47 to 4.84 | Mild anthropogenic disturbancest for occasional tree felling, frequent collection of fuelwood and other non-timber forest products | |
| Agroforestry | 10 to 17 | 4.59 to 4.60 | Regular weeding and harvest of above ground biomass | |
| Wet Rice Cultivation | 30 | 5.52 to 5.56 | Application of fertilizer. | |
| Plantation | 7 to 50 | 4.10 to 5.98 | Intercultural operations like weeding. | |
| Current Jhum | 2 | 4.52–4.54 | Annual harvest of above ground biomass, thereafter subjected to burning. | |
| Grassland | 23 | 4.36 to 4.92 | Subjected to annual burning. | |
| Jhum fallow | 7 | 4.52 to 4.56 | Conservation tillage and dibbling method of planting |
Fig 1Distribution of active and passive soil carbon at three soil depths in different land use systems.
Fine soil stock (FSS), total carbon (TC), soil inorganic carbon (SIC) and total organic carbon (TOC) in different land use types (0–45 cm soil depth) of Mizoram.
| Land Use | FSS in 15 cm | TC | SIC | TOC |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Forest | 6.56±0.80a | 3.05±0.58a | 0.31±0.06a | 2.75±0.52a |
| Agroforestry | 10.09±0.60a | 1.89±0.19ab | 0.19±0.02ab | 1.70±0.17ab |
| Wet Rice Cultivation | 9.88±0.34a | 1.78±0.06ab | 0.16±0.02ab | 1.62±0.07ab |
| Plantation | 8.63±0.62a | 1.53±0.13b | 0.15±0.01b | 1.38±0.12b |
| Current Jhum | 6.08±0.98a | 2.19±0.67ab | 0.24±0.06ab | 1.96±0.61ab |
| Grassland | 6.67±1.56a | 1.45±0.37ab | 0.14±0.02ab | 1.31±0.35ab |
| Jhum Fallow | 6.37±1.69a | 1.56±0.48ab | 0.16±0.05ab | 1.40±0.44ab |
± indicates standard error of mean. Values in same column followed by different letters are significantly different (p<0.05).
Soil organic carbon concentration (%) of varying lability at different soil depth classes in different land use types of Mizoram.
| Land Use Types | Very Labile Carbon (VLC) | Labile Carbon (LC) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0–15 cm | 15–30 cm | 30–45 cm | 0–15 cm | 15–30 cm | 30–45 cm | |
| Forest | 1.43±0.37 a | 0.89±0.11 a | 0.90±0.22 a | 0.62±0.15a | 0.50±0.08 a | 0.50±0.10 a |
| Agroforestry | 0.87±0.10 a | 0.67±0.05ab | 0.49±0.06 b | 0.39±0.05a | 0.32±0.02ab | 0.26±0.04 b |
| Wet Rice Cultivation | 1.29±0.03 a | 0.45±0.03ab | 0.28±0.03ab | 0.59±0.03a | 0.22±0.02 b | 0.18±0.01ab |
| Plantation | 0.75±0.08 a | 0.51±0.06 b | 0.40±0.33 b | 0.33±0.03a | 0.25±0.03 b | 0.22±0.02 b |
| Current Jhum | 1.09±0.34 a | 0.74±0.28ab | 0.54±0.12ab | 0.48±0.18a | 0.35±0.11ab | 0.33±0.07ab |
| Grassland | 0.96±0.36 a | 0.38±0.09 b | 0.22±0.02 b | 0.44±0.20a | 0.19±0.03 b | 0.15±0.01b |
| Jhum Fallow | 0.94±0.36 a | 0.46±0.12 b | 0.33±0.13ab | 0.37±0.11a | 0.18±0.03 b | 0.23±0.10ab |
| Forest | 0.72±0.19a | 0.47±0.05 a | 0.54±0.16 a | 0.71±0.14a | 0.41±0.04 a | 0.54±0.24 a |
| Agroforestry | 0.37±0.04a | 0.38±0.01ab | 0.28±0.04ab | 0.43±0.06ab | 0.43±0.09 a | 0.20±0.03ab |
| Wet Rice Cultivation | 0.53±0.01a | 0.28±0.05ab | 0.15±0.02ab | 0.49±0.02ab | 0.33±0.02 a | 0.09±0.02ab |
| Plantation | 0.36±0.04a | 0.31±0.03ab | 0.24±0.02 b | 0.32±0.03 b | 0.30±0.04 a | 0.16±0.02 b |
| Current Jhum | 0.44±0.14a | 0.41±0.16ab | 0.32±0.06ab | 0.50±0.16ab | 0.51±0.12 a | 0.17±0.04ab |
| Grassland | 0.39±0.20a | 0.25±0.12 b | 0.14±0.01 b | 0.41±0.15ab | 0.36±0.06 a | 0.05±0.00ab |
| Jhum Fallow | 0.44±0.19a | 0.25±0.07ab | 0.19±0.08ab | 0.37±0.14ab | 0.36±0.07 a | 0.07±0.03ab |
± indicates standard error of mean. Values in same column followed by different letters are significantly different (p<0.05).
Soil organic carbon concentration (%) of varying lability at in different land use types (0–45 cm soil depth) of Mizoram.
| Land Use Types | Very labile | Labile | Less labile | Non-labile | Active pool | Passive pool |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Forest | 1.07±0.21a | 0.54±0.09 a | 0.58±0.11a | 0.58±0.11a | 1.61±0.29 a | 1.13±0.22 a |
| Agroforestry | 0.68±0.07ab | 0.33±0.13ab | 0.34±0.02ab | 0.34±0.02ab | 1.07±0.25ab | 0.70±0.07ab |
| Wet Rice Cultivation | 0.67±0.03ab | 0.33±0.02ab | 0.32±0.02ab | 0.32±0.02ab | 1.00±0.08ab | 0.62±0.01ab |
| Plantation | 0.55±0.05b | 0.26±0.02 b | 0.30±0.03 b | 0.30±0.03 b | 0.82±0.07 b | 0.56±0.05 b |
| Current Jhum | 0.79±0.25ab | 0.39±0.13ab | 0.39±0.12ab | 0.39±0.12ab | 1.18±0.38ab | 0.78±0.23ab |
| Grassland | 0.52±0.14ab | 0.26±0.08ab | 0.26±0.06ab | 0.27±0.07ab | 0.78±0.22ab | 0.53±0.12ab |
| Jhum Fallow | 0.58±0.18ab | 0.27±0.09ab | 0.30±0.11ab | 0.30±0.11ab | 0.85±0.26ab | 0.56±0.18ab |
± indicates standard error of mean. Values in same column followed by different letters are significantly different (p<0.05).
Fig 2Distribution of soil organic carbon fractions of different lability (% of total organic carbon) in different land use types (0–45 cm soil depth) in Mizoram.
(Letters a, b, c describe whether the proportions of different carbon fractions are significantly different or not, where proportions with same letters indicate no significance (p<0.05), within and across the land use types under study).
Correlation coefficient (Pearson’s) between different organic carbon pools in soils (0–45 cm soil depth) under different land use types in Mizoram.
| Variable | TOC | VLC | LC | LLC | NLC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TOC | 1 | ||||
| VLC | 0.997 | 1 | |||
| LC | 0.978 | 0.970 | 1 | ||
| LLC | 0.983 | 0.980 | 0.944 | 1 | |
| NLC | 0.981 | 0.972 | 0.949 | 0.948 | 1 |
** correlarion is significant at 0.01 level (TOC- Total organic carbon; VLC- Very labile carbon; LC- Labile carbon; LLC- Less labile carbon; NLC- Non-labile carbon)
Fig 3Soil organic carbon stock (Mg C ha-1) at different soil depth in different land use types in Mizoram.
Fig 4Total organic carbon stock (Mg C ha-1) in different land use types (0–45 cm soil depth) in Mizoram.
Fig 5Litter inputs in different land use systems.
(Different letters a, b, c indicate significant difference (p<0.05) between the different land use types under study).