Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Soil CO2 emissions in agricultural watersheds with agroforestry and grass contour buffer strips

  • Published:
Agroforestry Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The potential for agricultural soils to act as a sink and sequester carbon (C) or a source and emit carbon dioxide (CO2) is largely dependent upon the agricultural management system. The establishment of permanent vegetation, such as trees and grass contour buffer strips, may cause accumulation of above- and below-ground C over time, thereby acting as a sink for tropospheric CO2. However, the effects of contour grass strips and grass-tree strips (agroforestry) on soil CO2 emissions have not been extensively studied in row-crop watersheds in the temperate regions. The objective of this study was to determine the effects of agroforestry and grass contour buffer strips and landscape position on soil surface efflux rate of CO2 in three adjacent agricultural watersheds with claypan soils in northeast Missouri. The three watersheds were in a corn-soybean rotation, and contained (1) cropped only (CR), (2) cropped with grass contour strips (GR), or (3) cropped with tree-grass contour strips (AF) management systems. Soil surface CO2 efflux was measured throughout the 2004 growing season at the upper (UBS), middle (MBS), and lower (LBS) backslope landscape positions within the three watersheds. The cumulative soil CO2 production was lowest in the CR (0.9 kg CO2-C m−2) compared to the AF (1.5 kg CO2-C m−2) and GR watersheds (1.5 kg CO2-C m−2). The lower backslope position (1.6 kg CO2-C m−2) across all three watersheds produced 32 and 40% greater cumulative soil CO2 than the upper and middle backslope positions, respectively. A 72-day incubation study determined the effects of 40, 60, 80, and 100% soil water-filled pore space (WFPS) and N rate (0 and 1.39 g KNO3 kg soil−1) on soil CO2 efflux from bulk soil collected under each management system. The cumulative CO2 production was highest in the grass soil (1,279 mg CO2-C kg soil−1) compared to the agroforestry (661 mg CO2-C kg soil−1) and cropped (483 mg CO2-C kg soil−1) soils regardless of WFPS and N rate. The highest cumulative CO2 production for the grass soil (1,279 mg CO2-C kg soil−1) occurred at 80% WFPS, and was approximately 2 to 2.6 times greater than the agroforestry and cropped soils at 80% WFPS. The results of this study indicate that conservation management practices, such as grass and grass-tree contour buffer strips, and landscape position affect soil surface CO2 production and accumulation of soil organic C that may influence soil C sequestration.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

AF:

Cropped with tree-grass contour strips

CO2 :

Carbon dioxide

CR:

Cropped only

DAA:

Days after N application

D b :

Bulk density

DOC:

Dissolved organic C

DON:

Dissolved organic N

GR:

Grass contour strips

LBS:

Lower backslope

MBS:

Middle backslope

NO −3 -N:

Nitrate nitrogen

POM-C:

Particulate organic matter C

POM-N:

Particulate organic matter N

SOM:

Soil organic matter

STEMP:

Soil temperature

TOC:

Total organic C

TN:

Total N

UBS:

Upper backslope

WFPS:

Water-filled pore space

References

  • Aiken RM, Jawson MD, Grahammer K, Polymenopoulos AD (1991) Positional, spatial correlated and random components of variability and carbon dioxide efflux. J Environ Qual 20:301–308

    Google Scholar 

  • Berg B, McClaugherty C (2003) Plant litter: decomposition, humus formation, carbon sequestration. Springer, Germany

    Google Scholar 

  • Beyer L (1991) Intersite characterization and variability of soil respiration in different arable and forest soils. Biol Fertil Soils 12:122–126. doi:10.1007/BF00341487

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blake GR, Hartge KH (1986) Bulk density. In: Klute A (ed) Methods of soil analysis, part 1, physical and mineralogical methods, 2nd edn. American Society of Agronomy, Madiosn, pp 363–375

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanco-Canqui H, Gantzer CJ, Anderson SH, Alberts EE, Ghidey F (2002) Saturated hydraulic conductivity and its impact on simulated runoff for claypan soils. Soil Sci Soc Am J 66:1596–1602

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bremer DJ, Ham JM, Owensby CE, Knapp AK (1998) Responses of soil respiration to clipping and grazing in a tallgrass prairie. J Environ Qual 27:1539–1548

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brookes PC (1995) The use of microbial parameters in monitoring soil pollution by heavy metals. Biol Fertil Soils 19:269–279. doi:10.1007/BF00336094

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Burke IC, Elliott ET, Cole CV (1995) Influence of microclimate, landscape position, and management on soil organic matter in agroecosystems. Ecol Appl 5:124–131. doi:10.2307/1942057

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buyanovsky GA, Kucera CL, Wagner GH (1987) Comparative analyses of carbon dynamics in native and cultivated ecosystems. Ecology 68:2023–2031. doi:10.2307/1939893

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cadisch G, Giller KE (1997) Driven by nature: plant litter quality and decomposition. CAB International, Oxford, 409 pp

  • Cambardella CA, Elliot ET (1992) Particulate organic matter changes across a grassland cultivation sequence. Soil Sci Soc Am J 56:777–783

    Google Scholar 

  • Cardon ZG, Hungate BA, Cambardella CA, Chapin FS, Field CB, Holland EA, Mooney HA (2001) Contrasting effects of elevated CO2 on old and new soil carbon pools. Soil Biol Biochem 33:365–373. doi:10.1016/S0038-0717(00)00151-6

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • DeJong E (1981) Soil aeration as affected by slope position and vegetative cover. Soil Sci 131:34–43

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Drury CF, Reynolds WD, Tan CS, Welacky TW, Calder W, McLaughlin NB (2006) Emissions of nitrous oxide and carbon dioxide: influence of tillage type and nitrogen placement depth. Soil Sci Soc Am J 70:570–581. doi:10.2136/sssaj2005.0042

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dugas WA (1993) Micrometeorological and chamber measurements of CO2 flux from bare soil. Agric Meteorol 67:115–128. doi:10.1016/0168-1923(93)90053-K

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freney JR (1997) Emission of nitrous oxide from soils used for agriculture. Nutr Cycl Agroecosyst 49:1–6. doi:10.1023/A:1009702832489

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gale WJ, Cambardella CA (2000) Carbon dynamics of surface residue and root derived organic matter under simulated no-till soil. Soil Sci Soc Am J 64:190–195

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Garrett HE, McGraw RL (2000) Alley cropping practices. In: Garrett HE, Rietveld WJ, Fisher RF (eds) North American Agroforestry: an integrated science and practice. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, pp 149–188

    Google Scholar 

  • Gold MA, Rietveld WJ, Garrett HE, Fisher RF (2000) Agroforestry nomenclature, concepts, and practices for the USA. In: Garrett HE, Rietveld WJ, Fisher RF (eds) North American Agroforestry: an integrated science and practice. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, pp 63–77

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanson PJ, Edwards NT, Garten CT, Andrews JA (2000) Separating root and soil microbial contributions to soil respiration: a review of methods and observations. Biogeochemistry 48:115–146. doi:10.1023/A:1006244819642

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Herbert BE, Bertsch PM (1995) Characterization of dissolved and colloidal organic matter in soil solution: a review. In: McFee WW, Kelly JM (eds) Carbon forms and functions in forest soils. Soil Science Society of America Inc., Madison, pp 63–88

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchinson GL, Livingston GP (1993) Use of chamber systems to measure trace gas fluxes. In: Harper LA, Mosier AR, Duxbury JM, Rolston DE (eds) Agricultural ecosystem effects on trace gases and global climate change Special Publication No. 55. American Society of Agronomy/Crop Science Society of America/Soil Science Society of America, Madison, pp 63–78

    Google Scholar 

  • Institute SAS (2000) SAS/STAT user’s guide, version 8.0. SAS Institute, Cary

    Google Scholar 

  • Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2007) Summary for policymakers. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL (eds) Climate Change 2007: the physical science basis. Cambridge University Press, New York

  • Jamison VC, Smith DD, Thornton JF (1968) Soil and water research on a claypan soil. USDA Technical Bulletin 1379, US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Jandl R, Sollins P (1997) Water-extractable soil carbon in relation to the belowground carbon cycle. Biol Fertil Soils 25:196–201. doi:10.1007/s003740050303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang P, Anderson SH, Kitchen NR, Sadler EJ, Sudduth KA (2007) Landscape and conservation management effects on hydraulic properties on a claypan-soil toposequence. Soil Sci Soc Am J 71:803–811. doi:10.2136/sssaj2006.0236

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Knops JMH, Tilman D (2000) Dynamics of soil nitrogen and carbon accumulation for 61 years after agricultural abandonment. Ecology 81:88–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lal R, Kimble JM, Levine E, Sterwart BA (1995) Soil management and greenhouse effect. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  • Lal R, Kimble J, Follett RF, Cole CV (1998) The potential of US cropland to sequester carbon and mitigate greenhouse effect. Sleeping Bear Press, Ann Arbor, p 128

    Google Scholar 

  • Lessard R, Rochette P, Topp E, Pattey E, Desjardins RL, Beaumont G (1994) Methane and carbon dioxide fluxes from poorly drained adjacent cultivated and forest sites. Can J Soil Sci 74:139–146

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Montagnini F, Nair PKR (2004) Carbon sequestration: an underexploited environmental benefit of agroforestry systems. Agrofor Syst 61:281–295. doi:10.1023/B:AGFO.0000029005.92691.79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myers DB, Kitchen NR, Sudduth KA, Grunwald S, Miles RJ, Saddler EJ, Udawatta RP (2008) Combining proximal and penetrating conductivity sensors for high resolution soil mapping. In: Proceedings of the first global workshop on high resolution digital soil sensing and mapping. Sydney, 2–4 Feb 2008

  • Nelson DW, Sommers LE (1996) Total carbon, organic carbon, and organic matter. In: Sparks DL (ed) Methods of soil analysis-part 3, chemical methods. Soil Science Society of America Inc., Madison, pp 961–1010

    Google Scholar 

  • Oren R, Ellsworth DS, Johnson KH, Phillips N, Ewers BE, Maier C, Schafer KVR, McCarthy H, Hendry G, McNulty SG, Katul GG (2001) Soil fertility limits carbon sequestration by forest ecosystems in a CO2 enriched atmosphere. Nature 411:469–472. doi:10.1038/35078064

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Paustian K, Cole CV, Sauerbeck D, Sampson N (1998) CO2 mitigation by agriculture: an overview. Clim Change 40:135–162. doi:10.1023/A:1005347017157

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rachman A, Anderson SH, Gantzer CJ (2005) Computed-tomographic measurement of soil macroporosity parameters as affected by stiff-stemmed grass hedges. Soil Sci Soc Am J 69:1609–1616. doi:10.2136/sssaj2004.0312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reicosky DC, Lindstorm MJ, Schumacher TE, Lobb DE, Malo DD (2005) Tillage-induced CO2 loss across an eroded landscape. Soil Tillage Res 81:183–194. doi:10.1016/j.still.2004.09.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robertson GP, Huston MA, Evans FC, Tiedje JM (1988) Spatial variability in a successional plant community: patterns of nitrogen availability. Ecology 69:1517–1524. doi:10.2307/1941649

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schjonning P, Thomsen IK, Moldrup P, Christensen BT (2003) Linking soil microbial activity to water and air-phase contents and diffusivities. Soil Sci Soc Am J 67:156–165

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schlesinger WH, Lichetr J (2001) Limited carbon storage in soils and litter of experimental forest plots under increased atmospheric CO2. Nature 411:466–469. doi:10.1038/35078060

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Senaviratne G, van Holm HJ (1998) CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions from a wetted tropical upland soil following surface mulch application. Soil Biol Biochem 30:1619–1622. doi:10.1016/S0038-0717(98)00004-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seobi T, Anderson SH, Udawatta RP, Gantzer CJ (2005) Influence of grass and agroforestry buffer strips on soil hydraulic properties for an Albaqualf. Soil Sci Soc Am J 69:893–901. doi:10.2136/sssaj2004.0280

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sharrow SH, Ismail S (2004) Carbon and nitrogen storage in agroforests, tree plantations, and pastures in western Oregon, USA. Agrofor Syst 60:123–130. doi:10.1023/B:AGFO.0000013267.87896.41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steel RGD, Torrie JH, Dickey DA (1997) Analysis of variance iv: split-plot designs and analysis. In: Principles and procedures of statistics: a biomedical approach. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 400–428

  • Tufekcioglu A, Raich JW, Isenhart TM, Schultz RC (2001) Soil respiration within riparian buffers and adjacent crop fields. Plant Soil 229:117–124. doi:10.1023/A:1004818422908

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tufekcioglu A, Raich JW, Isenhart TM, Schultz RC (2003) Biomass, carbon, and nitrogen dynamics of multi-species riparian buffers within an agricultural watershed in Iowa, USA. Agrofor Syst 57:187–198. doi:10.1023/A:1024898615284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Udawatta RP, Krstansky JJ, Henderson GS, Garrett HE (2002) Agroforestry practices, runoff, and nutrient loss: a paired watershed comparison. J Environ Qual 31:1214–1225

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Udawatta RP, Motavalli PP, Garrett HE (2004) Phosphorus loss and runoff characteristics in three adjacent agricultural watersheds with claypan soils. J Environ Qual 33:1709–1719

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Udawatta RP, Anderson SH, Garrett HE (2005) Tree, grass, and crop root length densities and soil water content within an agroforestry buffer system. In: Brooks KN, Ffolliott PF (eds) Moving agroforestry into the mainstream. The 9th North American Agroforestry Conference Proceedings, June 12–15, 2005, St. Paul, Minnesota. Department of Forest Resources, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN. [non-paginated CD-ROM] pp 1–16

  • Udawatta RP, Kremer RJ, Adamson BW, Anderson SH (2008) Variation in soil aggregate stability and enzyme activities in a temperate agroforestry practice. Appl Soil Ecol 39:153–160

    Google Scholar 

  • Unger PW, Kaspar TC (1994) Soil compaction and root growth: a review. Agron J 86:759–766

    Google Scholar 

  • Uri ND (2001) Conservation practices in US agriculture and their impact on carbon sequestration. J Environ Monit Assess 70:323–344. doi:10.1023/A:1010735510641

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • USEPA (1993) Paired watershed study design. 841-F-93-009. Office of Water, Washington, DC 20460

  • van Noordwijk M, Lawson G, Soumare A, Groot JJR, Hairiah K (1996) Root distribution of trees and crops: competition and/or complementarity. In: Ong CK, Huxley P (eds) Tree–crop interactions: a physiological approach. CAB International, Oxford, pp 319–364

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagai R, Bryre KR, Gower ST, Norman JM, Bundy LG (1998) Land use and environmental factors influencing soil surface CO2 flux and microbial biomass in natural and managed ecosystems in southern Wisconsin. Soil Biol Biochem 30:1501–1509. doi:10.1016/S0038-0717(98)00041-8

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wander M (2004) Soil organic matter fractions and their relevance to soil function. In: Magdoff F, Weil RR (eds) Soil organic matter in sustainable agriculture. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaman M, Matsushima M, Chang SX, Inubushi K, Nguyen L, Goto S, Kaneko F, Yoneyama T (2004) Nitrogen mineralization, N2O production and soil microbiological properties as affected by long-term applications of sewage sludge composts. Biol Fertil Soils 40:101–109. doi:10.1007/s00374-004-0746-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was funded through the University of Missouri Center for Agroforestry under cooperative agreements AG-02100251 with the USDA ARS Dale Bumpers Small Farm Research Center, Booneville, AR and CR 826704-01-0 with the US EPA. The results presented are the sole responsibility of the authors and/or the University of Missouri and may not represent the policies or positions of the funding agencies. We gratefully acknowledge the technical assistance of the University of Missouri Greenley Research Station and University of Missouri soil fertility staff, including Eduardo Navarro, Matt Jones, and Randy Smoot. Special thanks also to Dr. Mark Ellersieck for statistical analytical assistance.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Plant Sciences, University of Missouri Columbia, Columbia, MO, 65211, USA

    Neal J. Bailey

  2. Department of Soil, Environmental and Atmospheric Sciences, University of Missouri, 302 Anheuser-Busch Natural Resources Building, Columbia, MO, 65211, USA

    Peter P. Motavalli

  3. Center for Agroforestry, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, 65211, USA

    Ranjith P. Udawatta

  4. Division of Plant Sciences, University of Missouri Greenley Center, Novelty, MO, 63460, USA

    Kelly A. Nelson

Authors
  1. Neal J. Bailey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Peter P. Motavalli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ranjith P. Udawatta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kelly A. Nelson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter P. Motavalli.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bailey, N.J., Motavalli, P.P., Udawatta, R.P. et al. Soil CO2 emissions in agricultural watersheds with agroforestry and grass contour buffer strips. Agroforest Syst 77, 143–158 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-009-9218-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-009-9218-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation