4.6 Article

Spatial complexities in aboveground carbon stocks of a semi-arid mangrove community: A remote sensing height-biomass-carbon approach

Journal

ESTUARINE COASTAL AND SHELF SCIENCE
Volume 200, Issue -, Pages 194-201

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecss.2017.11.004

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. CSIRO Flagship Marine and Coastal Carbon Biogeochemical Cluster (Coastal Carbon Cluster)
  2. Australian Research Council [DP150104437]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Mangroves are integral to ecosystem services provided by the coastal zone, in particular carbon (C) sequestration and storage. Allometric relationships linking mangrove height to estimated biomass and C stocks have been developed from field sampling, while various forms of remote sensing has been used to map vegetation height and biomass. Here we combine both these approaches to investigate spatial patterns in living biomass of mangrove forests in a small area of mangrove in north-west Australia. This study used LiDAR data and Landsat 8 OLI (Operational Land Imager) with allometric equations to derive mangrove height, biomass, and C stock estimates. We estimated the study site, Mangrove Bay, a semiarid site in north-western Australia, contained 70 Mg ha(-1) biomass and 45 Mg C ha(-1) organic C, with total stocks of 2417 Mg biomass and 778 Mg organic C. Using spatial statistics to identify the scale of clustering of mangrove pixels, we found that living biomass and C stock declined with increasing distance from hydrological features (creek entrance: 0-150 m; y = -0.00041x + 0.9613, R-2 = 0.96; 150 -770 m; y = -0.0008x + 1.6808, R-2 = 0.73; lagoon: y = -0.0041x + 3.7943, R-2 = 0.78). Our results illustrate a set pattern of living C distribution within the mangrove forest, and then highlight the role hydrologic features play in determining C stock distribution in the arid zone. (C) 2017 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

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available