4.7 Article

Greenhouse gas fluxes in mangrove forest soil in an Amazon estuary

期刊

BIOGEOSCIENCES
卷 19, 期 23, 页码 5483-5497

出版社

COPERNICUS GESELLSCHAFT MBH
DOI: 10.5194/bg-19-5483-2022

关键词

-

资金

  1. Program of Alliances for Education and Training of the Organization of the American States
  2. Coimbra Group of Brazilian Universities

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The soil of the Amazon estuary's mangrove forests is a source of carbon dioxide and methane emissions, with soil organic matter, carbon and nitrogen ratios, and redox potential affecting carbon dioxide emissions.
Tropical mangrove forests are important carbon sinks, the soil being the main carbon reservoir. Understanding the variability and the key factors that control fluxes is critical to accounting for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, particularly in the current scenario of global climate change. This study is the first to quantify carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4) emissions using a dynamic chamber in natural mangrove soil of the Amazon. The plots for the trace gases study were allocated at contrasting topographic heights. The results showed that the mangrove soil of the Amazon estuary is a source of CO2 (6.66 g CO2 m(-2) d(-1)) and CH4 (0.13 g CH4 m(-2) d(-1)) to the atmosphere. The CO2 flux was higher in the high topography (7.86 g CO2 m(-2) d(-1)) than in the low topography (4.73 g CO2 m(-2) d(-1)) in the rainy season, and CH4 was higher in the low topography (0.13 g CH4 m(-2) d(-1)) than in the high topography (0.01 g CH4 m(-2) d(-1)) in the dry season. However, in the dry period, the low topography soil produced more CH4. Soil organic matter, carbon and nitrogen ratio (C/N), and redox potential influenced the annual and seasonal variation of CO2 emissions; however, they did not affect CH4 fluxes. The mangrove soil of the Amazon estuary produced 35.40 Mg CO2eq. ha(-1) yr(-1). A total of 2.16 kg CO2 m(-2) yr(-1) needs to be sequestered by the mangrove ecosystem to counterbalance CH4 emissions.

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

4.7
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