Assessment of Growing Stock, Above Ground Biomass and Sequestered Carbon in Sal Dominated Kushmi Forest Gorakhpur
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36808/if/2020/v146i11/147140Keywords:
Growing Stocks, Biomass, Carbon Stock, Kushmi Forest and Climate Change etc.Abstract
The intergovernmental panel on climate change identified that forest growing stocks is the largest terrestrial carbon sink in terrestrial ecosystem and account for nearly 90% of all leaving terrestrial biomass. The amount of carbon stocked by a forest can be estimated from the biomass accumulation since approximately half of forest dry biomass weight constitutes carbon. Present study was carried out during 2017-18 in Kushmi Sal Forest near Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh. The whole forest is a best example of plantation forest mainly dominated by Shorea robusta. The other associate species like Tectona grandis, Syzygium cumini, Terminalia arjuna, Albizia lebbeck, Dalbergia sissoo, Eucalyptus sp., Madhuca indica, Azadirachta indica, and Bombax ceiba were also found in certain part in patches or in scattered form. Present research is an attempt in this direction to quantify the growing stock and carbon stock of Kushmi forest. The woody volume of tress for each species was calculated using volume equation developed by FSI for various species. The total area of Kushmi forest is 3207.10 ha (Tilkonia forest range) comprises total number of forest tree 580480. The maximum number of tree belongs to species Shorea robusta (402560) followed by Tectona grandis (80640) whereas the least numbers of trees of species Bombax ceiba (5052). The maximum diameter was recorded in Madhuca indica (1.53m) followed by Azadirachta indica (1.38m) while minimum diameter was recorded in Dalbergia sissoo (0.51m). The total growing stock was found in Shorea robusta (7158573.87m3 ) followed by Tectona grandis (690116.45m3) while minimum 3 was found in Dalbergia sissoo (19966.64m3). The total above ground carbon stock in the research area was recorded 3.727 Mt C.References
Brown S., Gillespie A.J.R. and Lugo A.E. (1997). Biomass estimation methods for tropical forests with application to forest inventory data. Forest Science, 35: 881-902.
Brown S.L., Schroeder P. and Kern J.S. (1999). Spatial distribution of biomass in forest of the eastern USA. Forest Ecology and Management, 123: 81-90.
Chapin III F.S., Zavaleta E.S., Eviner V.T., Naylor R.L., Vitousek P.M., Reynolds H.L., Hooper D.U., Lavorel S., Sala O.E., Hobies S.E., Mack M.C. and Diaz S. (2000). Consequences of changing biodiversity. Nature, 405: 234-242.
Chavan B.L. and G.B. Rasal (2012). Carbon Sequestration potential of young Annona reticulate and Annonasquamosa from University of Aurangabad, International Journal of Physical and Social Sciences, 3: 2249-2496.
Christopher (2014). Regeneration and plant diversity of natural and planted Sal (Shorea robustaGaertn.F.) forests in the Terai Bhabhar of Sohagi barwa Wildlife Sanctuary, India. Journal of American Science, 6(3): 32-45
Dixon R.K., S. Brown, R.A. Houghton, A.M. Solomon, M.C. Trexler and J. Wisniewski. (1994). Carbon pools and flux of global forest ecosystems. Science, 263: 185-190.
Ganeshaiah N. (2003). An Alternative Approach to Biodiversity Evaluation: Case Study in the Lower Menkong Basin. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Edinburgh. India State of Forest Report (2015). Forest Survey of India, India State of Forest Report, Dehradun.
Jangra Rekha, Gupta S.R., Kumar Ravi and Singh G. (2010). Carbon sequestration in the Grevillea robusta plantation on a reclaimed sodic soil at Karnal in Northern India. International Journal of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 36(1) : 75-86.
Ketterings Q.M., Coe R., Van Noordwijk M., Ambagau Y. and Palm C.A. (2001). Reducing uncertainty in the use of allometric biomass equations for predicting above ground tree biomass in mixed secondary forest. Forest Ecology and Management, 146: 199-209.
Kirby K.R. and Potvin C. (2007). Variation in carbon storage among tree species: Implication for management of small scale carbon sink project. Forest Ecology and Management, 246: 208-221.
Pathak P. Hemant Kumar G., Kumari and Halliru Bilyaminu (2016). Biomass production potential in different species of bamboo in central Uttar Pradesh, The Ecoscan. 10(1&2): 41-43.
Ravindranath N.H; B.S. Somashekhar and M. Gadgil. (1997). Carbon flow in India forests. Climatic Change, 35: 297-320.
Richter D.D., Markewitz D., Dunsomb J.K., Wells C.G., Stuanes A., Allen H.L., Ureego B., Harrison K. and Bonani G.. (1995). Carbon cycling in a loblobby pine forest: Implication for the missing carbon sink and for the concept of soil. pp. 223-251. In: W.W. McFee & J.L. Kelly (eds.) Carbon Forms and Function in Forest Soils. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI.
Schroeder P. (1992). Carbon storage potential of short rotation tropical tree plantations. Forest Ecology and Management,50:31-41.
Sharma C.M; Baduni N.P; Gairola S; Ghildiyal S.K. and Suyal S. (2010). Tree diversity and carbon stocks of some major forest types of Garhwal Himalaya, India. Forest Ecology and Management, 260: 2170-2179.
Srivastava D. and Vellend M. (2005). Biodiversity-ecosystem function research: is it relevant to conservation? Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics, 36: 267-294.
Tan K., Piao S., Peng C. and Fang J. (2007). Satellite based estimation of biomass carbon stock for northeast China's forest, Forest Ecology and Management, 240 (1-3) 114-121.
Tilman D. (2001). Effects of diversity and composition on grassland stability and productivity. In Ecology: Achievement and Challenge, ed. N Huntly, S Levin, pp. 183-207. Oxford: Blackwell Sci.
Downloads
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Unless otherwise stated, copyright or similar rights in all materials presented on the site, including graphical images, are owned by Indian Forester.
