Literature DB >> 33765085

Productive wetlands restored for carbon sequestration quickly become net CO2 sinks with site-level factors driving uptake variability.

Alex C Valach1, Kuno Kasak1,2, Kyle S Hemes1,3, Tyler L Anthony1, Iryna Dronova1,4, Sophie Taddeo4, Whendee L Silver1, Daphne Szutu1, Joseph Verfaillie1, Dennis D Baldocchi1.   

Abstract

Inundated wetlands can potentially sequester substantial amounts of soil carbon (C) over the long-term because of slow decomposition and high primary productivity, particularly in climates with long growing seasons. Restoring such wetlands may provide one of several effective negative emission technologies to remove atmospheric CO2 and mitigate climate change. However, there remains considerable uncertainty whether these heterogeneous ecotones are consistent net C sinks and to what degree restoration and management methods affect C sequestration. Since wetland C dynamics are largely driven by climate, it is difficult to draw comparisons across regions. With many restored wetlands having different functional outcomes, we need to better understand the importance of site-specific conditions and how they change over time. We report on 21 site-years of C fluxes using eddy covariance measurements from five restored fresh to brackish wetlands in a Mediterranean climate. The wetlands ranged from 3 to 23 years after restoration and showed that several factors related to restoration methods and site conditions altered the magnitude of C sequestration by affecting vegetation cover and structure. Vegetation established within two years of re-flooding but followed different trajectories depending on design aspects, such as bathymetry-determined water levels, planting methods, and soil nutrients. A minimum of 55% vegetation cover was needed to become a net C sink, which most wetlands achieved once vegetation was established. Established wetlands had a high C sequestration efficiency (i.e. the ratio of net to gross ecosystem productivity) comparable to upland ecosystems but varied between years undergoing boom-bust growth cycles and C uptake strength was susceptible to disturbance events. We highlight the large C sequestration potential of productive inundated marshes, aided by restoration design and management targeted to maximise vegetation extent and minimise disturbance. These findings have important implications for wetland restoration, policy, and management practitioners.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 33765085      PMCID: PMC7993764          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0248398

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.240


  22 in total

1.  Contrasting ecosystem CO2 fluxes of inland and coastal wetlands: a meta-analysis of eddy covariance data.

Authors:  Weizhi Lu; Jingfeng Xiao; Fang Liu; Yue Zhang; Chang'an Liu; Guanghui Lin
Journal:  Glob Chang Biol       Date:  2016-08-09       Impact factor: 10.863

2.  Interannual variation of terrestrial carbon cycle: Issues and perspectives.

Authors:  Shilong Piao; Xuhui Wang; Kai Wang; Xiangyi Li; Ana Bastos; Josep G Canadell; Philippe Ciais; Pierre Friedlingstein; Stephen Sitch
Journal:  Glob Chang Biol       Date:  2019-11-29       Impact factor: 10.863

3.  Periodic carbon flushing to roots of Quercus rubra saplings affects soil respiration and rhizosphere microbial biomass.

Authors:  Zoe G Cardon; Andrew D Czaja; Jennifer L Funk; Pati L Vitt
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2002-10-01       Impact factor: 3.225

4.  The Eocene Arctic Azolla bloom: environmental conditions, productivity and carbon drawdown.

Authors:  E N Speelman; M M L Van Kempen; J Barke; H Brinkhuis; G J Reichart; A J P Smolders; J G M Roelofs; F Sangiorgi; J W de Leeuw; A F Lotter; J S Sinninghe Damsté
Journal:  Geobiology       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 4.407

5.  Effects of macrophyte functional group richness on emergent freshwater wetland functions.

Authors:  Virginie Bouchard; Serita D Frey; Janice M Gilbert; Sharon E Reed
Journal:  Ecology       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 5.499

6.  Wetland carbon storage controlled by millennial-scale variation in relative sea-level rise.

Authors:  Kerrylee Rogers; Jeffrey J Kelleway; Neil Saintilan; J Patrick Megonigal; Janine B Adams; James R Holmquist; Meng Lu; Lisa Schile-Beers; Atun Zawadzki; Debashish Mazumder; Colin D Woodroffe
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2019-03-06       Impact factor: 49.962

7.  Blue carbon potential of coastal wetland restoration varies with inundation and rainfall.

Authors:  Karita Negandhi; Grant Edwards; Jeffrey J Kelleway; Dean Howard; David Safari; Neil Saintilan
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-03-13       Impact factor: 4.379

8.  Carbon use efficiency of microbial communities: stoichiometry, methodology and modelling.

Authors:  Robert L Sinsabaugh; Stefano Manzoni; Daryl L Moorhead; Andreas Richter
Journal:  Ecol Lett       Date:  2013-04-30       Impact factor: 9.492

9.  Prompt rewetting of drained peatlands reduces climate warming despite methane emissions.

Authors:  Anke Günther; Alexandra Barthelmes; Vytas Huth; Hans Joosten; Gerald Jurasinski; Franziska Koebsch; John Couwenberg
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2020-04-02       Impact factor: 14.919

View more
  2 in total

1.  What evidence exists on the links between natural climate solutions and climate change mitigation outcomes in subtropical and tropical terrestrial regions? A systematic map protocol.

Authors:  Samantha H Cheng; Sebastien Costedoat; Eleanor J Sterling; Catherine Chamberlain; Arundhati Jagadish; Peter Lichtenthal; A Justin Nowakowski; Auset Taylor; Jen Tinsman; Steven W J Canty; Margaret B Holland; Kelly W Jones; Morena Mills; David Morales-Hidalgo; Starry Sprenkle-Hyppolite; Meredith Wiggins; Michael B Mascia; Carlos L Muñoz Brenes
Journal:  Environ Evid       Date:  2022-04-19

2.  Detecting Hot Spots of Methane Flux Using Footprint-Weighted Flux Maps.

Authors:  Camilo Rey-Sanchez; Ariane Arias-Ortiz; Kuno Kasak; Housen Chu; Daphne Szutu; Joseph Verfaillie; Dennis Baldocchi
Journal:  J Geophys Res Biogeosci       Date:  2022-08-10       Impact factor: 4.432

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.