Download PDF

Chinese Science Bulletin

, Volume 58, Issue 13, pp 1551–1557 | Cite as

Aboveground biomass and corresponding carbon sequestration ability of four major forest types in south China

  • QingQing Chen
  • WeiQiang Xu
  • ShengGong Li
  • ShengLei Fu
  • JunHua Yan
Open Access
Article Ecology
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

We estimated aboveground biomass carbon (T ABC) and net carbon accumulation rates (T NEP) for trees in four major forest types based on national forest inventory data collected in 1994–1998 and 1999–2003. The four types were Pinus massoniana forest, Cunninghamia lanceolata forest, hard broad-leaved evergreen forest and soft broad-leaved evergreen forest. We analyzed variations in T ABC and T NEP for five stand ages (initiation, young, medium, mature and old). In both time periods, estimated T ABC in all four forest types increased consistently with forest stand age and the oldest stage had the largest T ABC compared with other stages. Broad-leaved forests (hard and soft) had higher T ABC than needle-leaved forests (Pinus massoniana and Cunninghamia lanceolata) for each of the five age stages. The difference of T ABC between broad-leaved and needle-leaved forests increased with forest stand age. Comparison of estimated T NEP by age category indicated T NEP increased from the initiation stage to the young stage, and then decreased from the mature stage to old stage in all four forest types. T NEP for any particular stage depended on the forest type; for instance, broad-leaved forests at both the mature and old stages had greater T NEP than in needle-leaved forests. A logistic curve was applied to fit the relationship between T ABC and forest stand age. In each period, correlations in all four forest types were all statistically significant (P < 0.01) with R 2 > 0.95. T ABC was therefore predicted by these regression functions from 2000 to 2050 and the mean T NEP during the predicted period was estimated to be about 41.14, 31.53, 75.50 and 75.68 g C m−2 a−1 in Pinus massoniana forest, Cunninghamia lanceolata forest, hard broad-leaved forest and soft broad-leaved forest, respectively. Results from both forest inventory and regression prediction suggest broad-leaved forests are greater carbon sinks, and hence have greater carbon sequestration ability especially in the mature and old stages when compared to needle-leaved forests. Broad-leaved forests should have high levels of carbon sequestration when compared with needle-leaved forests in south China.

Keywords

broad-leaved forest needle-leaved forest aboveground biomass carbon accumulation rate logistic regression 
Download to read the full article text

References

  1. 1.
    Dixon R K, Brown S, Houghton R A, et al. Carbon pools and flux of global forest ecosystems. Science, 1994, 263: 185–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Beer C, Reichstein M, Tomelleri E, et al. Terrestrial gross carbon dioxide uptake: Global distribution and covariation with climate. Science, 2010, 329: 834–838CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zhou G Y, Liu S G, Li Z A, et al. Old-growth forests can accumulate carbon in soils. Science, 2006, 314: 1417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pan Y D, Birdsey R A, Fang J Y, et al. A large and persistent carbon sink in the world’s forests. Science, 2011, 333: 988–993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tan Z H, Zhang Y P, Douglas S, et al. An old-growth subtropical Asian evergreen forest as a large carbon sink. Atmos Environ, 2011, 48: 1548–1554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yan J H, Wang Y P, Zhou G Y, et al. Estimates of soil respiration and net primary production of three forests at different succession stages in South China. Glob Change Biol, 2006, 12: 810–821CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Piao S L, Fang J Y, Ciais P, et al. The carbon balance of terrestrial ecosystems in China. Nature, 2009, 458: 1009–1013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chapin III F S, Matson P A, Mooney H A. Principles of Terrestrial Ecosystem Ecology. New York: Springer-Verlag New York, 2002. 285–287Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pregitzer K S, Euskirchen E S. Carbon cycling and storage in world forests: Biome patterns related to forest age. Glob Change Biol, 2004, 10: 2052–2077CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tuyl S V, Law B E, Turner D P, et al. Variability in net primary production and carbon storage in biomass across Oregon forests an assessment integrating data from forest inventories, intensive sites, and remote sensing. For Ecol Manage, 2005, 209: 273–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zhao M F, Xiang W H, Peng C H, et al. Simulating age-related changes in carbon storage and allocation in a Chinese fir plantation growing in southern China using the 3-PG model. For Ecol Manage, 2009, 257: 1520–1531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    The State Forestry Administration on Forest Resources Management Department. The major results of the sixth national forest resources inventory (in Chinese). 2006Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    The State Forestry Administration on Forest Resources Management Department. National forest resources continuous investigation technical regulations (in Chinese). 2003Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fang J Y, Chen A P, Peng C H, et al. Changes in forest biomass carbon storage in China between 1949 and 1998. Science, 2001, 292: 2320–2322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Law B E, Sun O J, Campbell J, et al. Changes in carbon storage and fluxes in a chronosequence of ponderosa pine. Glob Change Biol, 2003, 9: 510–524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zaehle S, Sitch S, Prentice C, et al. The importance of age-related decline in forest NPP for modeling regional carbon balances. Ecol Appl, 2006, 16: 1555–1574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hudiburg T, Law B, Turner D P, et al. Carbon dynamics of Oregon and Northern California forests and potential land-based carbon storage. Ecol Appl, 2009, 19: 163–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Norby R J, Luo Y Q. Evaluating ecosystem responses to rising atmospheric CO2 and global warming in a multi-factor world. New Phytol, 2004, 162: 281–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Luo Y Q. Terrestrial carbon-cycle feedback to climate warming. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst, 2007, 38: 683–712CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Luyssaert S, Schulze E D, Borner A, et al. Old-growth forests as global carbon sinks. Nature, 2008, 455: 213–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zhang Y P, Tan Z H, Song Q H, et al. Respiration controls the unexpected seasonal pattern of carbon flux in an Asian tropical rain forest. Atmos Environ, 2010, 44: 3886–3893CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Xu B, Guo Z D, Piao S L, et al. Biomass carbon stocks in China’s forests between 2000 and 2050: A prediction based on forest biomass-age relationships. Sci China Life Sci, 2010, 53: 587–594Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ryan M G, Binkley D, Fownes J H. Age-related decline in forest productivity: Pattern and process. Adv Ecol Res, 1997, 27: 213–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Delzon S, Loustau D. Age-related decline in stand water use: Sap flow and transpiration in a pine forest chronosequence. Agric For Meteorol, 2005, 129: 105–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tang X L, Wang Y P, Zhou G Y, et al. Different patterns of ecosystem carbon accumulation between a young and an old-growth subtropical forest in Southern China. Plant Ecol, 2011, 212: 1385–1395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hardiman B S, Bohret G, Gough C M, et al. The role of canopy structural complexity in wood net primary production of a maturing northern deciduous forest. Ecology, 2011, 92: 1818–1827CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • QingQing Chen
    • 1
    • 3
  • WeiQiang Xu
    • 1
    • 3
  • ShengGong Li
    • 2
  • ShengLei Fu
    • 1
  • JunHua Yan
    • 1
  1. 1.South China Botanical GardenChinese Academy of SciencesGuangzhouChina
  2. 2.Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources ResearchChinese Academy of SciencesBeijingChina
  3. 3.Graduate University of Chinese Academy of SciencesBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations