Assessment of Carbon Sequestration Potential Of Different Tree Plantations In Forest Research Centre, Mulugu, Telangana State
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36808/if/2023/v149i7/169583Keywords:
Biomass, Carbon, Carbon Sequestration, Climate Change, Carbon Sink.Abstract
The current study was conducted in five different plantations, Teak plantation (2500 stems/ha), Teak tissue cultured plantation, Dalbergia latifolia, Eucalyptus and Hardiwickia binata) raised in different years at Forest Research Centre, Mulugu, Siddipet, Tel angana. The growth parameters were recorded and biomass and carbon stocks of five plantations were assessed. The highest volume was observed in Teak 3 plantation (Super-cultured) with 171.15 m /ha followed by Eucalyptus 3 plantation with 130.18 m /ha. The aboveground biomass ranged from 8.53 t/ha – 123.33 t/ha, Teak plantation (2500 stems/ha) with highest aboveground biomass of 123.33 t/ha, belowground biomass ranged from 2.21 t/ha – 32.04 t/ha and the total biomass ranged from 10.75 t/ha – 155.27 t/ha. The highest total biomass was recorded in Teak plantation (2500 stems/ha) with 155.27 t/ha. The carbon stocks and carbon sequestration potential were also assessed and the highest carbon stock and carbon sequestration potential was recorded in Teak plantation (2500 stems/ha) with 72.98 t/ha and 267.61 t/ha respectively. Not only as timber value and other uses but also the plantations were mitigating the impacts of climate change at a local level. These plantations also act as a carbon sink.References
Baishya R., Barik S.K. and Upadhaya K. (2009). Distribution pattern of aboveground biomass in natural and plantation forests of humid tropics in northeast India. Tropical ecology, 50(2): 295.
Banday M., Bhardwaj D.R. and Pala N.A. (2018). Variation of stem density and vegetation carbon pool in subtropical forests of Northwestern Himalaya. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 37(4): 389-402.
Bastin J.F ., Finegold Y ., Garcia C., Mollicone D., Rezende M., Routh D., Zohner C.M. and Crowther T .W . (2019). The global tree restoration potential. Science, 365(6448): 76-79.
Bonan G.B. (2008). Forests and climate change: forcings, feedbacks, and the climate benefits of forests. Science, 320(5882): 1444-1449.
Canaveira P . (2013). Options and elements for an accounting framework for the land sector in the post-2020 climate regime. Terraprima Report to the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment.
Chaturvedi A.N. (1982). Forest mensuration (No. 634.9285 C495f). Dehra Dun, IN: International Book.
Chaturvedi O.P ., Handa A.K., Kaushal R., Uthappa A.R., Sarvade S. and Panwar P . (2016). Biomass production and carbon sequestration through agroforestry. Range Management and Agroforestry, 37(2): 1 16-127.
Giri N., Rawat L. and Kumar P . (2014). Assessment of biomass carbon stock in a Tectona grandis Linn. f. plantation ecosystem of Uttarakhand, India. International Journal of Engineering, Science and Technology, 3(5): 46-53.
Gupta D.K., Bhatt R.K., Mohamed M.N., Shukla A.K. and Jangi d B. L. (2019). Carbon sequestration potential of Hardwickia binata Roxb. based agroforestry in hot semi-arid environment of India. Current science, 116(1): 1 12-116.
IPCC (2006). IPCC Guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories, Prepared by the National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme, IGES, Japan.
Nair P .R. (201 1). Methodological challenges in estimating carbon sequestration potential of agroforestry systems. Carbon sequestration potential of agroforestry systems: opportunities and challenges, 3-16.
Nolan R.H., Sinclair J., Eldridge D.J. and Ramp D. (2018). Biophysical risks to carbon sequestration and storage in Australian drylands. Journal of environmental management, 208: 102-11 1.
Onrizal K.C., Mansor M. and Hartono R. (2007). Allometric Biomass and Carbon Stock Equations of Planted Eucalyptus grandis in Toba Plateau.
Ravula R., Reddy M.C., Rajendra M.P ., Bodiga S., Sihag K. and Sharma M.R.C. (2022). Carbon sequestration potential of Eucalyptus plantations in central agroclimatic zone of Telangana State. Indian Journal of Agroforestry, 24(2): 76-81.
Reddy M. C. and Madi wal ar S. L. ( 2014) . Productivity assessment and economic analysis of teak plantations in different agro climatic zones of Karnataka. Indian Forester, 140(3): 287-290.
Sahu K.P ., Lalji S., Alone R.A., Jhariya M.K. and Pawar G.V. (2013). Biomass and carbon storage pattern in an age series of teak plantation in dry tropics. Vegetos., 26(1): 205-217.
Sanderman J. and Berhe A.A. (2017). The soil carbon erosion paradox. Nature Climate Change, 7(5): 317-319.
Singh A. K. , Sahu C. and Sahu S. K. ( 2020) . Car bon sequestration potential of a teak plantation forest in the Eastern Ghats of India. Journal of Environmental Biology, 41(4): 770-775.
Veldman J.W., Aleman J.C., Alvarado S.T ., Anderson T .M., Archibald S., Bond W.J., Boutton T .W ., Buchmann N., Buisson E., Canadell J.G. and Dechoum M.D.S. (2019). Comment on “The global tree restoration potentialâ€. Science, 366(6463): eaay7976.
Zhou X., Wen Y ., Goodale U.M., Zuo H., Zhu H., Li X., Y ou Y ., Yan L., Su Y . and Huang X. (2017). Optimal rotation length for carbon sequestration in Eucalyptus plantations in subtropical China. New Forests, 48: 609-627.
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.
