Assessing Tree Coverage and the Direct and Mediation Effect of Tree Diversity on Carbon Storage through Stand Structure in Homegardens of Southwestern Bangladesh
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Site
2.2. Sampling Design and Field Inventory
2.3. Remote Sensing Data and Processing
2.4. Data Analysis
2.4.1. Biomass Carbon
2.4.2. Soil Carbon Calculation
2.4.3. Total Carbon Stock
2.4.4. Woody Species Diversity Calculation
3. Results
3.1. Homegardens Cover
3.2. Diversity and Stand Structure
3.3. Carbon Stocks
3.4. Bivariate Relationship between Stand Structure, Diversity and Carbon Pools
3.5. Direct, Indirect and Total Effects of Biodiversity and Stand Structure on Carbon Pools
4. Discussion
4.1. Homegardens Vegetation Coverage
4.2. Stand Structure
4.3. Carbon Stocks
4.4. Effects of Tree Diversity and Stand Structure on Carbon Pools
4.5. Implication for Nationally Determined Contributions
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Fargione, J.E.; Bassett, S.; Boucher, T.; Bridgham, S.D.; Conant, R.T.; Cook-Patton, S.C.; Ellis, P.W.; Falcucci, A.; Fourqurean, J.W.; Gopalakrishna, T.; et al. Natural climate solutions for the United States. Sci. Adv. 2018, 4, eaat1869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gao, Y.; Gao, X.; Zhang, X. The 2 °C Global Temperature Target and the Evolution of the Long-Term Goal of Addressing Climate Change—From the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change to the Paris Agreement. Engineering 2017, 3, 272–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Duguma, L.A.; Nzyoka, J.; Minang, P.A.; Bernard, F. How agroforestry propels achievement of nationally determined contributions. ICRAF Policy Br. 2017, 34, 1–8. [Google Scholar]
- Nair, P.K.R.; Kumar, B.M.; Nair, V.D. Agroforestry as a strategy for carbon sequestration. J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 2009, 172, 10–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kirby, K.R.; Potvin, C. Variation in carbon storage among tree species: Implications for the management of a small-scale carbon sink project. For. Ecol. Manag. 2007, 246, 208–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cardinael, R.; Umulisa, V.; Toudert, A.; Olivier, A.; Bockel, L.; Bernoux, M. Revisiting IPCC Tier 1 coefficients for soil organic and biomass carbon storage in agroforestry systems. Environ. Res. Lett. 2018, 13, 124020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kabir, E.; Webb, E.L. Floristics and structure of southwestern Bangladesh homegardens. Int. J. Biodivers. Sci. Manag. 2008, 4, 54–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mohri, H.; Lahoti, S.; Saito, O.; Mahalingam, A.; Gunatilleke, N.; Irham, I.; Hoang, V.T.; Hitinayake, G.; Takeuchi, K.; Herath, S. Assessment of ecosystem services in homegarden systems in Indonesia, Sri Lanka, and Vietnam. Ecosyst. Serv. 2013, 5, 124–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Delaney, M.; Hairiah, K.; Purnomosidhi, P. Carbon stocks in Indonesian homegarden systems: Can smallholder systems be targeted for increased carbon storage? Am. J. Altern. Agric. 2002, 17, 138–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saha, S.K.; Nair, P.K.R.; Nair, V.D.; Kumar, B.M. Soil carbon stock in relation to plant diversity of homegardens in Kerala, India. Agrofor. Syst. 2009, 76, 53–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kumar, B.M. Species richness and aboveground carbon stocks in the homegardens of central Kerala, India. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2011, 140, 430–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mattsson, E.; Ostwald, M.; Nissanka, S.P.; Pushpakumara, D.K.N.G. Quantification of carbon stock and tree diversity of homegardens in a dry zone area of Moneragala district, Sri Lanka. Agrofor. Syst. 2014, 89, 435–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mensah, S.; Veldtman, R.; Assogbadjo, A.E.; Kakaï, R.G.; Seifert, T. Tree species diversity promotes aboveground carbon storage through functional diversity and functional dominance. Ecol. Evol. 2016, 6, 7546–7557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Birhane, E.; Ahmed, S.; Hailemariam, M.; Negash, M.; Rannestad, M.M.; Norgrove, L. Carbon stock and woody species diversity in homegarden agroforestry along an elevation gradient in southern Ethiopia. Agrofor. Syst. 2020, 94, 1099–1110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thomas, N.; Baltezar, P.; Lagomasino, D.; Stovall, A.; Iqbal, Z.; Fatoyinbo, L. Trees outside forests are an underestimated resource in a country with low forest cover. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 7919. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bardhan, S.; Jose, S.; Biswas, S.; Kabir, K.; Rogers, W. Homegarden agroforestry systems: An intermediary for biodiversity conservation in Bangladesh. Agrofor. Syst. 2012, 85, 29–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Islam, M.; Dey, A.; Rahman, M. Effect of Tree Diversity on Soil Organic Carbon Content in the Homegarden Agroforestry System of North-Eastern Bangladesh. Small-Scale For. 2014, 14, 91–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rahman, M.; Kabir, E.; Akon, A.J.U.; Ando, K. High carbon stocks in roadside plantations under participatory management in Bangladesh. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 2015, 3, 412–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kabir, E.; Webb, E.L. Household and homegarden characteristics in southwestern Bangladesh. Agrofor. Syst. 2008, 75, 129–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Statistic Division, Ministry of Planning, Bangladesh Secretariat. BBS Statistical Year Book of Bangladesh.Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (BSS); The Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh: Dhaka, Bangladesh, 2012.
- Drusch, M.; Del Bello, U.; Carlier, S.; Colin, O.; Fernandez, V.; Gascon, F.; Hoersch, B.; Isola, C.; Laberinti, P.; Martimort, P.; et al. Sentinel-2: ESA’s Optical High-Resolution Mission for GMES Operational Services. Remote Sens. Environ. 2012, 120, 25–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dhodhi, M.K.; Saghri, J.A.; Ahmad, I.; Ul-Mustafa, R. D-ISODATA: A Distributed Algorithm for Unsupervised Classification of Remotely Sensed Data on Network of Workstations. J. Parallel Distrib. Comput. 1999, 59, 280–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rahman, M.; Lagomasino, D.; Lee, S.; Fatoyinbo, T.; Ahmed, I.; Kanzaki, M. Improved assessment of mangrove forests in Sundarbans East Wildlife Sanctuary using WorldView 2 and Tan DEM -X high resolution imagery. Remote Sens. Ecol. Conserv. 2019, 5, 136–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, L.; Gong, P. Google Earth as a virtual globe tool for Earth science applications at the global scale: Progress and perspectives. Int. J. Remote Sens. 2011, 33, 3966–3986. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Congalton, R.G.; Green, K. Assessing the Accuracy of Remotely Sensed Data: Principles and Practices, 2nd ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2009; ISBN 978-1-4200-5512-2. [Google Scholar]
- Chave, J.; Andalo, C.; Brown, S.; Cairns, M.A.; Chambers, J.; Eamus, D.; Fölster, H.; Fromard, F.; Higuchi, N.; Kira, T.; et al. Tree allometry and improved estimation of carbon stocks and balance in tropical forests. Oecologia 2005, 145, 87–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cairns, M.A.; Brown, S.; Helmer, E.H.; Baumgardner, G.A. Root biomass allocation in the world’s upland forests. Oecologia 1997, 111, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zanne, A.E.; Lopez-Gonzalez, G.; Coomes, D.A.; Ilic, J.; Jansen, S.; Lewis, S.L.; Miller, R.B.; Swenson, N.G.; Wiemann, M.C.; Chave, J. Data from: Towards a worldwide wood economics spectrum. Ecol. Lett. 2009, 12, 351–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pearson, T. Sourcebook for Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry Projects; Winrock International and the BioCarbon Fund of the World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2005; pp. 56–64. [Google Scholar]
- Maynard, D.G.; Curran, M.P. Bulk density measurement in forest soils. In Soil Sampling and Methods of Analysis; Carter, M.R., Gregorich, E.G., Eds.; Taylor & Francis: London, UK, 2008; pp. 863–869. [Google Scholar]
- Sparks, D.L.; Page, A.L.; Helmke, P.A.; Loeppert, R.H. Methods of Soil Analysis Part 3—Chemical Methods; SSSA Book Series; Soil Science Society of America, American Society of Agronomy: Madison, WI, USA, 1996; ISBN 978-0-89118-866-7. [Google Scholar]
- Shannon, C.E. A Mathematical Theory of Communication. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 1948, 27, 379–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Margalef, R. Information theory in biology. Gen. Syst. Yearb. 1958, 3, 36–71. [Google Scholar]
- R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing; R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Grace, J.B.; Bollen, K.A. Interpreting the Results from Multiple Regression and Structural Equation Models. Bull. Ecol. Soc. Am. 2005, 86, 283–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zuur, A.F.; Ieno, E.N.; Elphick, C.S. A protocol for data exploration to avoid common statistical problems: Data exploration. Methods Ecol. Evol. 2010, 1, 3–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rahman, M.; Zimmer, M.; Ahmed, I.; Donato, D.; Kanzaki, M.; Xu, M. Co-benefits of protecting mangroves for biodiversity conservation and carbon storage. Nat. Commun. 2021, 12, 3875. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Potapov, P.; Siddiqui, B.N.; Iqbal, Z.; Aziz, T.; Zzaman, B.; Islam, A.; Pickens, A.; Talero, Y.; Tyukavina, A.; Turubanova, S.; et al. Comprehensive monitoring of Bangladesh tree cover inside and outside of forests, 2000–2014. Environ. Res. Lett. 2017, 12, 104015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khan, N.I.; Islam, R.; Rahman, A.; Azad, S.; Mollick, A.S.; Kamruzzaman, M.; Sadath, N.; Feroz, S.; Rakkibu, G.; Knohl, A. Allometric relationships of stand level carbon stocks to basal area, tree height and wood density of nine tree species in Bangladesh. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 2020, 22, e01025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rahman, M.L.; Hossain, M.K. Status of fodder and non-fodder tree species in Chunati wildlife sanctuary of Chittagong forest division, Bangladesh. Int. J. For. Usufructs Manag. 2003, 4, 9–14. [Google Scholar]
- Bajigo, A.; Tadesse, M. Woody species diversity of traditional agroforestry practices in Gununo Watershed in Wolayitta Zone, Ethiopia. For. Res. 2016, 4, 155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Takimoto, A.; Nair, P.R.; Nair, V.D. Carbon stock and sequestration potential of traditional and improved agroforestry systems in the West African Sahel. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2008, 125, 159–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Phelps, J.; Webb, E.; Adams, W.M. Biodiversity co-benefits of policies to reduce forest-carbon emissions. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2012, 2, 497–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ruiz-Jaen, M.C.; Potvin, C. Can we predict carbon stocks in tropical ecosystems from tree diversity? Comparing species and functional diversity in a plantation and a natural forest. New Phytol. 2010, 189, 978–987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rahman, M.; Khan, N.I.; Hoque, A.K.F.; Ahmed, I. Carbon stock in the Sundarbans mangrove forest: Spatial variations in vegetation types and salinity zones. Wetl. Ecol. Manag. 2014, 23, 269–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- UNFCCC. Report of the Conference of the Parties on its Seventh Session. In Proceedings of the Conference of the Parties, Seventh Session, Marrakesh, Morocco, 29 October–10 November 2001. [Google Scholar]
Equation(s) | Notes | Reference |
---|---|---|
AGB = ρ × exp(−1.499 + 2.148 × ln(DBH) + 0.207 × (ln(DBH))2 − 0.0281(ln(DBH))3) | For all dicot trees | Chave et al. [26] |
AGB = 6.666 + 12.826 × ht0.5 × ln(ht) | For palm, coconut and date trees | Pearson et al. [29] |
BGB = exp(−1.0587 + 0.8836 × lnAGB) | For root biomass | Cairns et al. [27] |
Pixel Based | Google Earth Based | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Homegardens | Non-Homegardens | Total | Users (%) | Commission (%) | |
Homegardens | 56 | 1 | 57 | 98.25 | 1.75 |
Non-homegardens | 3 | 55 | 58 | 95.16 | 5.17 |
Total | 59 | 56 | 115 | ||
Producers (%) | 94.92 | 98.21 | Overall | 96.52 | |
Commission (%) | 5.08 | 1.79 | Kappa | 0.93 |
Variables | Minimum | Maximum | Mean | SE |
---|---|---|---|---|
Shannon–Wiener index () | 1.91 | 3.01 | 2.56 | 0.04 |
Margalef index (R) | 1.44 | 3.03 | 2.31 | 0.06 |
Stem density (trees ha−1) | 600 | 1600 | 1055 | 35.61 |
Mean DBH (cm) | 8.77 | 24.45 | 14.49 | 0.49 |
Tree height (m) | 5.84 | 11.00 | 7.88 | 0.17 |
Basal area (m2 ha−1) | 4.04 | 29.31 | 13.76 | 0.96 |
Village | Aboveground Biomass Carbon (Mg ha−1) | Belowground Biomass Carbon (Mg ha−1) | Soil Organic Carbon (0–15 cm) (Mg ha−1) | Soil Organic Carbon (15–30 cm) (Mg ha−1) | Total Biomass Carbon (Mg ha−1) | Total Soil Organic Carbon (Mg ha−1) | Total Carbon (Mg ha−1) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Senhati | 45.01 ± 6.95 b | 9.98 ± 1.36 b | 26.18 ± 2.25 a | 27.94 ± 3.38 ab | 54.99 ± 8.30 b | 54.12 ± 3.99 ab | 109.10 ± 10.89 a |
Chandani mahal | 88.00 ± 6.39 a | 18.11 ± 1.16 a | 26.04 ± 2.18 a | 20.08 ± 3.29 b | 106.11 ± 7.56 a | 46.12 ± 4.63 b | 152.22 ± 10.15 a |
Bativita | 55.05 ± 10.07 ab | 11.89 ± 1.94 ab | 29.44 ± 3.02 a | 34.79 ± 2.00 a | 66.94 ± 12.01 ab | 64.23 ± 3.85 a | 131.17 ± 12.14 a |
Hagigram | 61.47 ± 10.47 ab | 13.12 ± 1.99 ab | 27.48 ± 3.63 a | 22.21 ± 3.35 b | 74.59 ± 12.46 ab | 49.70 ± 6.28 ab | 124.30 ± 16.22 a |
Baracpur | 49.96 ± 14.79 b | 10.82 ± 2.81 b | 31.28 ± 2.67 a | 27.04 ± 3.85 ab | 60.78 ± 17.59 b | 58.32 ± 5.66 ab | 119.10 ± 19.06 a |
Ghosgati | 66.83 ± 7.28 ab | 14.18 ± 1.38 ab | 30.80 ± 2.20 a | 29.23 ± 3.27 ab | 81.01 ± 8.67 ab | 60.03 ± 4.21 ab | 141.03 ± 10.83 a |
Kamargati | 67.82 ± 10.86 ab | 14.34 ± 2.00 ab | 30.03 ± 6.46 a | 29.32 ± 4.39 ab | 82.16 ± 12.86 ab | 59.35 ± 3.74 ab | 141.51 ± 14.14 a |
Lakhoati | 49.20 ± 13.18 b | 10.70 ± 2.51 b | 30.30 ± 2.27 a | 27.10 ± 2.06 ab | 59.91 ± 15.69 b | 57.40 ± 3.38 ab | 117.31 ± 18.40 a |
Average | 60.42 ± 3.93 | 12.89 ± 0.75 | 28.94 ± 1.12 | 27.21 ± 1.25 | 73.31 ± 4.67 | 56.16 ± 1.71 | 129.47 ± 5.10 |
Indirect and Total Effects | AGC | BGC | SOC1 | SOC2 | TBC | TSC | TCS |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Std. eff. | Std. eff. | Std. eff. | Std. eff. | Std. eff. | Std. eff. | Std. eff. | |
Indirect effect of the Shannon diversity through basal area | 0.282 * | 0.282 * | −0.017 | −0.049 | 0.282 * | −0.035 | 0.201 * |
Indirect effect of the Shannon diversity through tree canopy height | −0.056 | −0.056 | 0.004 | 0.017 | −0.056 | 0.014 | −0.035 |
Total effect of the Shannon diversity | 0.393 ** | 0.393 ** | 0.513 *** | 0.106 | 0.393 ** | 0.411 ** | 0.544 *** |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Rahman, M.M.; Kundu, G.K.; Kabir, M.E.; Ahmed, H.; Xu, M. Assessing Tree Coverage and the Direct and Mediation Effect of Tree Diversity on Carbon Storage through Stand Structure in Homegardens of Southwestern Bangladesh. Forests 2021, 12, 1661. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12121661
Rahman MM, Kundu GK, Kabir ME, Ahmed H, Xu M. Assessing Tree Coverage and the Direct and Mediation Effect of Tree Diversity on Carbon Storage through Stand Structure in Homegardens of Southwestern Bangladesh. Forests. 2021; 12(12):1661. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12121661
Chicago/Turabian StyleRahman, Md Mizanur, Gauranga Kumar Kundu, Md Enamul Kabir, Heera Ahmed, and Ming Xu. 2021. "Assessing Tree Coverage and the Direct and Mediation Effect of Tree Diversity on Carbon Storage through Stand Structure in Homegardens of Southwestern Bangladesh" Forests 12, no. 12: 1661. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12121661