4.3 Article

Blue Carbon Stock of the Bangladesh Sundarban Mangroves: What could Be the Scenario after a Century?

期刊

WETLANDS
卷 36, 期 6, 页码 1033-1045

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s13157-016-0819-7

关键词

Blue carbon; Mangroves; Sundarban; Bangladesh; Markov chain; Cellular automata

资金

  1. 'Assessing Health, Livelihoods, Ecosystem Services and Poverty Alleviation in Populous Deltas [NERC] [NE/J002755/1]
  2. Ecosystem Services for Poverty Alleviation (ESPA) programme
  3. Department for International Development (DFID)
  4. Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC)
  5. Natural Environment Research Council (NERC)
  6. NERC [NE/J002453/1, noc010010, NE/J002852/1, NE/J002755/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  7. Natural Environment Research Council [NE/J002755/1, NE/J002852/1, noc010010, NE/J002453/1] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The total blue carbon stock of the Bangladesh Sundarban mangroves was evaluated and the probable future status after a century was predicted based on the recent trend of changes in the last 30 years and implementing a hybrid model of Markov Chain and Cellular automata. At present 36.24 Tg C and 54.95 Tg C are stored in the above-ground and below-ground compartments respectively resulting in total blue carbon stock of 91.19 Tg C. According to the prediction 15.88 Tg C would be lost from this region by the year 2115. The low saline species composition classes dominated mainly by Heritiera spp. accounts for the major portion of the carbon sock at present (45.60 Tg C), while the highly saline regions stores only 14.90 Tg C. The prediction shows that after a hundred years almost 22.42 Tg C would be lost from the low saline regions accompanied by an increase of 8.20 Tg C in the high saline regions dominated mainly by Excoecaria sp. and Avicennia spp. The net carbon loss would be due to both mangrove area loss (similar to 510 km(2)) and change in species composition leading to 58.28 Tg of potential CO2 emission within the year 2115.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据