4.5 Article

Predicting aboveground biomass of woody encroacher species in semi-arid rangelands, Ethiopia

Journal

JOURNAL OF ARID ENVIRONMENTS
Volume 96, Issue -, Pages 64-72

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaridenv.2013.04.007

Keywords

Aboveground woody biomass; Acacia species; Allometric equations; Bush; Carbon sequestration; Rangeland; Regression models; Savanna

Funding

  1. Dr. Hermann Eiselen PhD grant (Foundation fiat panis)
  2. DAAD (German Academic Exchange Service) scholarship in the frame of the Food Security Center of the University of Hohenheim

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Species-specific allometric models were developed to predict aboveground biomass (AGB) of eight woody species in the Borana rangelands, Ethiopia. The 23 equations developed (8 species; three biomass components: total aboveground, stem, and branches) fit the data well to predict total AGB and by components for each of the species (r(2) > 0.70; p < 0.001). The AGB of tree shaped species (e.g., Acacia bussei and Acacia etabaica) were significantly predicted from a single predictor (circumference of the stem at ankle height), with a high coefficient of determination (r(2) > 0.95; p < 0.001). In contrast, the AGB of bushy shrubs (e.g., Acacia oerfota) was more effectively predicted by using the canopy volume (r(2) = 0.84; p < 0.001). Shrubs with a tall stem and an umbrella-like canopy structure (e.g., Acacia mellifera) were most accurately predicted by a combination of both circumference of the stem at ankle height and canopy volume (r(2) = 0.95; p < 0.001). Hence, our species-specific allometric models could accurately estimate their woody aboveground biomass in a semi-arid savanna ecosystem of southern Ethiopia. These equations will help in future carbon-trade discussions in times of climate change and CO2 emission concerns and mitigation strategies. (c) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available