Does forest management affect the magnitude and direction of the afforestation effect on soil methane fluxes? A meta-analysis

Evidence suggests that tree plantations change soil methane (CH4) fluxes (magnitude and/or direction of the fluxes) compared to herbaceous land (i.e. afforestation effect) due to the effect of trees increasing methanotroph bacteria abundance and enhancing soil gas diffusivity. However, the magnitude...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gatica, Gabriel, Fernandez, María Elena, Juliarena, Maria Paula, Gyenge, Javier
Formato: info:ar-repo/semantics/artículo
Lenguaje:Inglés
Publicado: Elsevier 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/15579
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378112722000032
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2022.120009
_version_ 1855037341370941440
author Gatica, Gabriel
Fernandez, María Elena
Juliarena, Maria Paula
Gyenge, Javier
author_browse Fernandez, María Elena
Gatica, Gabriel
Gyenge, Javier
Juliarena, Maria Paula
author_facet Gatica, Gabriel
Fernandez, María Elena
Juliarena, Maria Paula
Gyenge, Javier
author_sort Gatica, Gabriel
collection INTA Digital
description Evidence suggests that tree plantations change soil methane (CH4) fluxes (magnitude and/or direction of the fluxes) compared to herbaceous land (i.e. afforestation effect) due to the effect of trees increasing methanotroph bacteria abundance and enhancing soil gas diffusivity. However, the magnitude of this afforestation effect is highly variable across studies. Here, we evaluated whether the variation in the afforestation effect depends on forestry management strategies, described by stand age and density, as well as taxonomic identity of the tree species, and the interaction with climatic conditions. To this end, we conducted a meta-analysis using 47 paired samples of afforested and contiguous herbaceous land from 14 studies located in different biomes worldwide. We found that afforestation predominantly increases the capacity of soil net CH4 uptake (i.e. more negative fluxes) compared to herbaceous land, but the magnitude of this effect was highly heterogeneous across paired samples. This heterogeneity was explained by environmental conditions, but significant effects of forest stand age and density were also found proving the importance of forest management on this ecological service. Soil net CH4 uptake following afforestation increases with increasing stand age. Although the stand stocking effect could be tested with a limited number of studies (24 out of the 47 paired samples), the results suggest that net CH4 uptake decreases with tree stocking (stand density) in the range of values up to 1500 individuals per ha. No change in CH4 fluxes was observed above this high stand density. Contrary to our expectations, no effect of taxonomic identity of the trees considering the most planted genera (Pinus and Eucalyptus) was observed in the average soil CH4 fluxes. Furthermore, a significant correlation between the afforestation effect on soil water content and CH4 flux suggests that the most plausible cause of the increased soil net CH4 uptake is driven by the forest impact on soil desiccation, which in turn increases in sites with higher water limitation (i.e. higher potential evapotranspiration and high temporal rainfalls variations within the ranges of the available studies). Finally, our study provides evidence that by modifying rotation time and stand stocking, afforested land may increase its environmental service as a sink of atmospheric CH4.
format info:ar-repo/semantics/artículo
id INTA15579
institution Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA -Argentina)
language Inglés
publishDate 2023
publishDateRange 2023
publishDateSort 2023
publisher Elsevier
publisherStr Elsevier
record_format dspace
spelling INTA155792023-10-18T16:13:23Z Does forest management affect the magnitude and direction of the afforestation effect on soil methane fluxes? A meta-analysis Gatica, Gabriel Fernandez, María Elena Juliarena, Maria Paula Gyenge, Javier Mitigación del Cambio Climático Gases de Efecto Invernadero Contenido de Agua en el Suelo Metano Forestación Climate Change Mitigation Greenhouse Gases Soil Water Content Methane Forestation Evidence suggests that tree plantations change soil methane (CH4) fluxes (magnitude and/or direction of the fluxes) compared to herbaceous land (i.e. afforestation effect) due to the effect of trees increasing methanotroph bacteria abundance and enhancing soil gas diffusivity. However, the magnitude of this afforestation effect is highly variable across studies. Here, we evaluated whether the variation in the afforestation effect depends on forestry management strategies, described by stand age and density, as well as taxonomic identity of the tree species, and the interaction with climatic conditions. To this end, we conducted a meta-analysis using 47 paired samples of afforested and contiguous herbaceous land from 14 studies located in different biomes worldwide. We found that afforestation predominantly increases the capacity of soil net CH4 uptake (i.e. more negative fluxes) compared to herbaceous land, but the magnitude of this effect was highly heterogeneous across paired samples. This heterogeneity was explained by environmental conditions, but significant effects of forest stand age and density were also found proving the importance of forest management on this ecological service. Soil net CH4 uptake following afforestation increases with increasing stand age. Although the stand stocking effect could be tested with a limited number of studies (24 out of the 47 paired samples), the results suggest that net CH4 uptake decreases with tree stocking (stand density) in the range of values up to 1500 individuals per ha. No change in CH4 fluxes was observed above this high stand density. Contrary to our expectations, no effect of taxonomic identity of the trees considering the most planted genera (Pinus and Eucalyptus) was observed in the average soil CH4 fluxes. Furthermore, a significant correlation between the afforestation effect on soil water content and CH4 flux suggests that the most plausible cause of the increased soil net CH4 uptake is driven by the forest impact on soil desiccation, which in turn increases in sites with higher water limitation (i.e. higher potential evapotranspiration and high temporal rainfalls variations within the ranges of the available studies). Finally, our study provides evidence that by modifying rotation time and stand stocking, afforested land may increase its environmental service as a sink of atmospheric CH4. EEA Balcarce Fil: Gatica, Gabriel. Universidad Nacional del Centro de la Provincia de Buenos Aires; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Centro de Investigaciones en Física e Ingeniería del Centro de la Provincia de Buenos Aires; Argentina. Fil: Fernández, María Elena. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Instituto de Innovación para la Producción Agropecuaria y el Desarrollo Sostenible; Argentina. Fil: Juliarena, María Paula. Universidad Nacional del Centro de la Provincia de Buenos Aires; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Centro de Investigaciones en Física e Ingeniería del Centro de la Provincia de Buenos Aires; Argentina. Fil: Gyenge, Javier. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Instituto de Innovación para la Producción Agropecuaria y el Desarrollo Sostenible; Argentina. 2023-10-18T15:58:04Z 2023-10-18T15:58:04Z 2022-03 info:ar-repo/semantics/artículo info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/15579 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378112722000032 0378-1127 (print) 1872-7042 (online) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2022.120009 eng info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) application/pdf Elsevier Forest Ecology and Management 507: 120009 (March 2022)
spellingShingle Mitigación del Cambio Climático
Gases de Efecto Invernadero
Contenido de Agua en el Suelo
Metano
Forestación
Climate Change Mitigation
Greenhouse Gases
Soil Water Content
Methane
Forestation
Gatica, Gabriel
Fernandez, María Elena
Juliarena, Maria Paula
Gyenge, Javier
Does forest management affect the magnitude and direction of the afforestation effect on soil methane fluxes? A meta-analysis
title Does forest management affect the magnitude and direction of the afforestation effect on soil methane fluxes? A meta-analysis
title_full Does forest management affect the magnitude and direction of the afforestation effect on soil methane fluxes? A meta-analysis
title_fullStr Does forest management affect the magnitude and direction of the afforestation effect on soil methane fluxes? A meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Does forest management affect the magnitude and direction of the afforestation effect on soil methane fluxes? A meta-analysis
title_short Does forest management affect the magnitude and direction of the afforestation effect on soil methane fluxes? A meta-analysis
title_sort does forest management affect the magnitude and direction of the afforestation effect on soil methane fluxes a meta analysis
topic Mitigación del Cambio Climático
Gases de Efecto Invernadero
Contenido de Agua en el Suelo
Metano
Forestación
Climate Change Mitigation
Greenhouse Gases
Soil Water Content
Methane
Forestation
url http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/15579
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378112722000032
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2022.120009
work_keys_str_mv AT gaticagabriel doesforestmanagementaffectthemagnitudeanddirectionoftheafforestationeffectonsoilmethanefluxesametaanalysis
AT fernandezmariaelena doesforestmanagementaffectthemagnitudeanddirectionoftheafforestationeffectonsoilmethanefluxesametaanalysis
AT juliarenamariapaula doesforestmanagementaffectthemagnitudeanddirectionoftheafforestationeffectonsoilmethanefluxesametaanalysis
AT gyengejavier doesforestmanagementaffectthemagnitudeanddirectionoftheafforestationeffectonsoilmethanefluxesametaanalysis