Influence of land cover types on soil quality and carbon storage in Moramo Education Estate, Southeast Sulawesi, Indonesia

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

SYAMSU ALAM
SAHTA GINTING
M. TUFAILA HEMON
SITTI LEOMO
LAODE MUHAMMAD HARJONI KILOWASID
JUFRI KARIM KARIM
YUSANTO NUGROHO
JERIELS MATATULA
PANDU YUDHA ADI PUTRA WIRABUANA

Abstract

Abstract. Alam S, Ginting S, Hemon MT, Leomo S, Kilowasid LMH, Karim J, Nugroho Y, Matatula J, Wirabuana PYAP. 2022. Influence of land cover types on soil quality and carbon storage in Moramo Education Estate, Southeast Sulawesi, Indonesia. Biodiversitas 23: 4371-4376. This study investigated the influence of different land cover types on soil quality and carbon storage in Moramo Education Estate (MEE). Information is required as fundamental consideration to determine the best landscape management strategies for supporting soil conservation and climate change mitigation. Data were collected from three types of land cover generally found in this area, including forests, shrubs, and savannas. Three permanent sampling plots were randomly placed in every land cover as replicates with a size of 20 m × 20 m. Six parameters were used to describe the soil quality, i.e., soil acidity, soil organic carbon, total nitrogen, available phosphorus, exchangeable potassium, and cation exchange capacity. The above and belowground carbon storage from every plot was quantified. The soil quality and carbon storage among land cover types were compared using analysis of variance and Tukey’s honestly significant difference. Pearson’s correlation analysis was also applied to evaluate the relationship between soil quality and carbon storage. The results show that soil quality significantly differed in the exchangeable potassium and cation exchange capacity. A similar trend was also demonstrated in aboveground carbon storage. The highest average carbon storage was recorded in forests (150.50 ± 27.79 t ha?1), followed by shrubs (52.50 ± 15.02 t ha?1) and savannas (45.97 ± 4.42 t ha?1). The total carbon storage at different land covers was significantly correlated to soil acidity, available phosphorus, and cation exchange capacity. Carbon storage improved with the increased available phosphorus and cation exchange capacity. In contrast, carbon storage was negatively correlated with soil acidity. Overall, the land cover types significantly influenced soil quality and carbon storage in MEE.

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

References
Alam S, Purwanto BH, Hanudin EKO, Tarwaca EKA, Putra S. 2020. Soil diversity influences on oil palm productivity in ultramafic ecosystems , Southeast Sulawesi , Indonesia. Biodiversitas J. Biol. Divers. 21: 5521–5530. https://doi.org/10.13057/biodiv/d211161
Amelung W, Bossio D, Vries W, Kögel-Knabner I, Lehmann J, Amundson R, Bol R, Collins C, Lal R, Leifeld J, Minasny B, Pan G, Paustian K, Rumpel C, Sanderman J, Groenigen JW, Mooney S, Wesemael B, Wander M, Chabbi A. 2020. Towards a global-scale soil climate mitigation strategy. Nat. Commun. 11: 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-18887-7
Bhandari J, Zhang Y. 2019. Effect of altitude and soil properties on biomass and plant richness in the grasslands of Tibet, China, and Manang District, Nepal. Ecosphere 10: 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.2915
Carstensen A, Herdean A, Schmidt SB, Sharma A, Spetea C, Pribil M, Husted S. 2018. The impacts of phosphorus deficiency on the photosynthetic electron transport chain. Plant Physiol. 177: 271–284. https://doi.org/10.1104/PP.17.01624
Castellini M, Diacono M, Gattullo CE, Stellacci AM. 2021. Sustainable agriculture and soil conservation. Appl. Sci. 11: 11–16. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11094146
Catoni M, D’Amico ME, Zanini E, Bonifacio E. 2016. Effect of pedogenic processes and formation factors on organic matter stabilization in alpine forest soils. Geoderma 263: 151–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2015.09.005
Chandra LR, Gupta S, Pande V, Singh N. 2016. Impact of forest vegetation on soil characteristics: a correlation between soil biological and physico-chemical properties. 3 Biotech 6: 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13205-016-0510-y
Chave J, Andalo C, Brown S, Cairns MA, Chambers JQ, Eamus D, Fölster H, Fromard F, Higuchi N, Kira T, Lescure JP, Nelson BW, Ogawa H, Puig H, Riéra B, Yamakura T. 2005. Tree allometry and improved estimation of carbon stocks and balance in tropical forests. Oecologia 145: 87–99. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-005-0100-x
Costa ACS, Junior IGS, Canton LC, Gil LG, Figueiredo R. 2020. Contribution of the chemical and mineralogical properties of sandy-loam tropical soils to the cation exchange capacity. Rev. Bras. Cienc. do Solo 44: 1–18. https://doi.org/10.36783/18069657rbcs20200019
Estefan G, Sommer R, Ryan J. 2013. Methods of soil, plant, and water analysis. International Center for Agriculture Research in the Dry Areas.
Feng J, Ahmed OH, Jalloh MB, Omar L, Kwan YM, Musah AA, Poong KH. 2022. Soil nutrient retention and ph buffering capacity are enhanced by calciprill and sodium silicate. Agronomy 12: 1–24. https://doi.org/10.3390/ agronomy12010219
Giweta M. 2020. Role of litter production and its decomposition, and factors affecting the processes in a tropical forest ecosystem: A review. J. Ecol. Environ. 44: 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41610-020-0151-2
Grussu G. Testolin R. Saulei S, Farcomeni A, Yosi CK, De Sanctis M, Attorre F. 2016. Optimum plot and sample sizes for carbon stock and biodiversity estimation in the lowland tropical forests of Papua New Guinea. Forestry 89: 150–158. https://doi.org/10.1093/forestry/cpv047
Grzyb A, Wolna-Maruwka A, Niewiadomska A. 2020. Environmental factors affecting the mineralization of crop residues. Agronomy 10: 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10121951
Hairiah K. Rahayu S. 2007. Technical guide carbon storage at different landuse type. World Agroforestry Centre, Bogor.
Jacoby R, Peukert M, Succurro A, Koprivova A. 2017. The role of soil microorganisms in plant mineral nutrition — current knowledge and future directions. Front. Plant Sci. 8: 1–19. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.01617
Latifah S, Sulistiyono N. 2013. Carbon sequestration potential in aboveground biomass of hybrid eucalyptus plantation forest. J. Trop. For. Manag. 19: 54–62. https://doi.org/10.7226/jtfm.19.1.54
Matatula J, Afandi AY, Wirabuana PYAP. 2021. Short communication: A comparison of stand structure, species diversity and aboveground biomass between natural and planted mangroves in Sikka, East nusa tenggara, indonesia. Biodiversitas J. Biol. Divers. 22: 1098–1103. https://doi.org/10.13057/biodiv/d220303
Miljakovi? D, Marinkovi? J, Baleševi?-Tubi? S. 2020. The significance of Bacillus spp. in disease suppression and growth promotion of field and vegetable crops. Microorganisms 8: 1–19. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms8071037
Purwanto BH, Alam S. 2020. Impact of intensive agricultural management on carbon and nitrogen dynamics in the humid tropics. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 66: 50–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/00380768.2019.1705182
Rambey R. Susilowati A. Rangkuti AB. Onrizal O. Desrita, Ardi R, Hartanto A. 2021. Plant diversity, structure and composition of vegetation around barumun watershed, north sumatra, indonesia. Biodiversitas J. Biol. Divers. 22: 3250–3256. https://doi.org/10.13057/biodiv/d220819
Sadono R, Wardhana W, Wirabuana PYAP, Idris F. 2021a. Soil chemical properties influences on the growth performance of Eucalyptus urophylla planted in dryland ecosystems, East Nusa Tenggara. J. Degrad. Min. Lands Manag. 8: 2635–2642. https://doi.org/10.15243/jdmlm.2021.082.2635
Sadono R, Wardhana W, Wirabuana PYAP, Idris F. 2021b. Allometric equations for estimating aboveground biomass of Eucalytpus urophylla S.T. Blake in East Nusa Tenggara. J. Trop. For. Manag. 27: 24–31. https://doi.org/10.7226/jtfm.27.1.24
Sales GB, Lessa TAM, Freitas DA, Veloso MDM, Silva MLS, Fernandes LA, Frazão LA. 2020. Litterfall dynamics and soil carbon and nitrogen stocks in the Brazilian palm swamp ecosystems. For. Ecosyst. 7: 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40663-020-00251-2
Schjoerring JK, Cakmak I, White PJ. 2019. Plant nutrition and soil fertility: synergies for acquiring global green growth and sustainable development. Plant Soil 434, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-018-03898-7
Setiahadi R. 2017. How significant is the existence of forest community contribution in GHG emissions reduction? J. Eng. Appl. Sci. 12: 4826–4830. https://doi.org/10.3923/jeasci.2017.4826.4830
Sugihara S, Shibata M, Mvondo AD, Araki S, Funakawa S. 2014. Effect of vegetation on soil C, N, P and other minerals in Oxisols at the forest-savanna transition zone of central Africa. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 60: 45–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/00380768.2013.866523
Taillardat P, Friess DA, Lupascu M. 2018. Mangrove blue carbon strategies for climate change mitigation are most effective at the national scale. Biol. Lett. 14: 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2018.0251
Tang G, Li K, Zhang C, Gao C, Li B. 2013. Accelerated nutrient cycling via leaf litter, and not root interaction, increases growth of Eucalyptus in mixed-species plantations with Leucaena. For. Ecol. Manage. 310: 45–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2013.08.021
Wirabuana PYAP, Sadono R, Juniarso S, Idris, F. 2020a. Interaction of fertilization and weed control influences on growth , biomass , and carbon in eucalyptus hybrid (E. pellita × E. brassiana). J. Manaj. Hutan Trop. 26: 144–154. https://doi.org/10.7226/jtfm.26.2.144
Wirabuana PYAP, Setiahadi R, Sadono R, Lukito M, Martono DS. 2021. The influence of stand density and species diversity into timber production and carbon stock in community forest. Indones. J. For. Res. 8: 13–22. https://doi.org/10.20886/ijfr.2021.8.1.13-22
Wirabuana PYAP, Setiahadi R, Sadono R, Lukito M, Martono DS, Matatula J. 2020b. Allometric equations for estimating biomass of community forest tree species in Madiun , Indonesia. Biodiversitas 21, 4291–4300. https://doi.org/10.13057/biodiv/d210947
Xie H, Tang Y, Yu M, Geoff WG. 2021. The effects of afforestation tree species mixing on soil organic carbon stock, nutrients accumulation, and understory vegetation diversity on reclaimed coastal lands in Eastern China. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 26: 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2021.e01478

Most read articles by the same author(s)

<< < 1 2