4.7 Article

Wood carbon content of tree species in Eastern China: Interspecific variability and the importance of the volatile fraction

Journal

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Volume 85, Issue 3, Pages 659-662

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2006.04.022

Keywords

carbon content; carbon sequestration; China; volatile carbon; wood chemistry

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Data on the mass density and carbon content of tree organs, and in particular stem wood, are essential for accurate assessments of forest carbon sequestration. However most available data, including that for East Asia, has neglected the volatile C fraction. Wood samples were collected and assayed for C content from 14 native tree species in Jilin Province, NE China. C content showed statistically significant variation among species, ranging from 48.4% to 51.0%. The volatile C fraction was non-negligible, averaging 2.2%, and showed high variation among species. As found in prior studies, wood C content was appreciably higher in conifer than hardwood (angiosperm) species (50.8 +/- 0.1% vs. 49.5 +/- 0.2%, respectively). Wood carbon density (gC/CM3) showed very high inter-specific variation, due mainly to differences in wood specific gravity. Our analyses, in conjunction with recently published data from North America, indicate a global mean value of 47.5 +/- 0.5% wood C content exclusive of volatile C; the widely used 50% figure corresponds more closely to total wood C inclusive of the volatile fraction. Failure to include volatile C or to use species- or higher-taxon-specific C content values in forest C assessments is likely to introduce biases on the order similar to 4 6%. In addition, the stocks and flows of the volatile C fraction in wood are in themselves an important and sorely neglected aspect of forest C processes likely to be strongly impacted by harvests and other management practices. (C) 2006 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available