ارزیابی کمی اثر فعالیت های آبخیزداری بر ترسیب و ذخیرۀ کربن به منظور کاهش تغییرات اقلیمی (مطالعۀ موردی: حوضۀ آبخیز پررود- سرشاخۀ حوضۀ آبخیز شاهرود)

نوع مقاله : پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانش‌آموختۀ دکتری آبخیزداری، گروه احیای مناطق خشک و کوهستانی، دانشکدۀ منابع طبیعی، دانشگاه تهران

2 استاد گروه احیای مناطق خشک و کوهستانی، دانشکدۀ منابع طبیعی، دانشگاه تهران

3 استاد دانشکدۀ کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد علوم و تحقیقات تهران

4 دانشیار گروه احیای مناطق خشک و کوهستانی، دانشکدة منابع طبیعی، دانشگاه تهران

چکیده

به‌منظور ارزیابی کمی اثر فعالیت‌های مختلف آبخیزداری بر ترسیب و ذخیرۀ کربن، نمونه‌برداری از پوشش گیاهی، لاشبرگ و خاک برای هر یک از تیمارها در 10 منطقه از حوضۀ مطالعه‌شده، که معرف تغییرات و نوسانات خاک و پوشش گیاهی بود، به روش سیستماتیک- تصادفی با استفاده از 10 ترانسکت و 100 پلات صورت گرفت. نتایج نشان داد در همۀ تیمارها خاک بیشترین تأثیر را در ترسیب کربن اکوسیستم دارد. لاشبرگ کمترین مشارکت را در بین اجزای سهیم در ترسیب کربن کل در همۀ تیمارها داشته است. علوفه‌کاری و کپه‏کاری به‌ترتیب با 152 و 148 کیلوگرم در هکتار بیشترین و تیمار بذرپاشی با 74 کیلوگرم در هکتار کمترین ترسیب کربن توسط لاشبرگ را داشته‏اند. در نهایت، نتایج این تحقیق نشان داد مراتع طبیعی، که وضعیت خوبی از نظر پوشش گیاهی و خاک دارند، در هر دو عمق خاک و همچنین به‌طور کلی (خاک+ بیوماس گیاهی+ لاشبرگ) با 84/647 تن در هکتار تا عمق 50 سانتی‌متری خاک بیشترین و سدهای سنگی ملاتی با 35/169 تن در هکتار تا عمق 50 سانتی‌متری خاک کمترین مقدار ترسیب کربن کل را دارند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Quantitative evaluation of the effects of watershed management operations on carbon sequestration and storage in order to reduce climate change (Case study: Parood Watershed- One of the sub basins of Shahrood Basin)

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mohammad Tahmoures 1
  • Mohammad Jafari 2
  • Hasan Ahmadi 3
  • Hosein Azarnivand 2
  • Ali Akbar Nazari Samani 4
1 Faculty of Natural Resources, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran
2 Faculty of Natural Resources, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran
3 Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

In order to evaluate the effects of watershed management practices on carbon sequestration and storage, Vegetation, litter and soil samples in each treatment were taken by systematic-randomly method from 10 areas of the basin that represents the variation of soil and vegetation along 10 transects and 100 plots (Except for small earth dams and biomechanical treatments which there were 2 small earth dams and 3 biomechanical treatments in this basin so samples were taken from all of them respectively along three and one transects). Also soil samples were taken at each transects randomly in two depths (0-10 cm and 10-50 cm), soil samples were tested in soil laboratory. Results indicate that in all treatments most amount of sequestered carbon was occurred in the soil (about 99% of whole carbon stocks in the ecosystem). Finally the results showed natural rangeland that have good conditions in terms of vegetation and soil have the most carbon stock in two soil depths and overall (soil + biomass + litter) with 647.84 ton/ha up to a depth of 50 cm from the soil surface and mortar stone dams with 169.35 ton/ha have the lowest carbon stock in this basin.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Watershed management
  • carbon stock
  • Parood
 Lal R. Soil carbon stocks under present and future climate with specific reference to European eco regions, Jour. Nutrient Cycling in Agro ecosystems. 2008; 81(2): 113-127.
[2]. Stockmann U, Adams MA, Crawford JW, Field DJ, Henakaarchchi N, Jenkins M, et al. The knowns, known unknowns and unknowns of sequestration of soil organic carbon. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2013; 164(1), 80–99.
[3]. Selim HM, Newman, A, Zhang, L, Arceneaux, A, Tubaña, B, Gaston, LA. Distributions of organic carbon and related parameters in a Louisiana sugarcane soil. Soil Tillage Res. 2016; 155, 401–411.
[4]. Teng J, Xiang T, Huang Z, Wu J, Jiang P, Meng C, Li Y, Fuhrmann JJ. Spatial distribution and variability of carbon storage in different sympodial bamboo species in China. J. Environ. Manag. 2015;168, 46–52.
[5]. Brown J, Angerer J, Salley S, Blaisdell R and Stuth J. Improving estimates of rangeland carbon sequestration potential in the U.S. Southwest. Rangeland Ecology & Management. 2012; 63:147–154.
[6]. Chen LF, He ZB, Du J, Yang JJ, Zhu X. Patterns and environmental controls of soil organic carbon and total nitrogen in alpine ecosystems of northwestern China. Catena. 2016; 137, 37–43.
[7]. Chang X F, Wang S P, Zhu X X, Cui SJ, Luo CY, Zhang ZH, Wilkes A. Impacts of management practices on soil organic carbon in degraded alpine meadows on the Tibetan Plateau. Jour. Biogeosciences Discuss. 2014;11: 417– 440.
[8]. Zhiming Qi, Patricia NS, Bartling R, Derner D, Gale H, Dunn Liwang Ma. Development and evaluation of the carbon–nitrogen cycle module for the GPFARM-Range model. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture. 2012; 83:1–10.
[9]. Li Q, Yu P, Li G, Zhou D, Chen X. Overlooking soil erosion induces underestimation of the soil Closs in degraded land. Quaternary Int. 2014; 349, 287– 290.
[10]. Naseri S, Jafari M, Tavakoli H, Arzani, H. Effect of mechanical control practices on soil and vegetation carbon sequestration (Case study: Catchment Basin of Kardeh- Iran). Jour. Biodiversity and Environmental Sciences. 2014; 5(2): 122 -135.
 
[11]. Naseri S, Tavakoli H, Jafari M, Arzani H. Impacts of Rangeland Reclamation and Management on Carbon Stock in North East of Iran (Case Study: Kardeh Basin, Mashhad, Iran). Journal of Rangeland Science. 2016; 6(4), 320-333.
[12]. Lashanizand M, Parvizi y, Shahrokhvandi SR, Rafiee B. Comparative evaluation of carbon sequestration in relation to watershed management practices and reclamation operations (Case Study: Rimele, Romeshkan flood spreading and Abkhandari Koohdasht), Iranian Journal of Range and Desert Reseach. 2013; 20 (2), 397-402.
[13]. Derner JD, Schuman GE. Carbon sequestration and rangelands: Asynthesis of Land management and precipitation effects. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation. 2015; 62(2): 77-85.
[14]. Hill MJ, Britten R, McKeon GM. A scenario calculator for effect of grazing land management on carbon stock in Australian rangelands. Environ. Model. And Software. 2013; (18):627-644.
[15]. Zhao B, Li Z, Li P, Xu G, Gao H, Cheng Y, et al. Spatial distribution of soil organic carbon and its influencing factors under the condition of ecological construction in a hilly-gully
watershed of the Loess Plateau, China. Geoderma. 2017; 296, 10–17.
[16]. Regional Water Company of Qazvin province report. The part of water resources management. 2015; 19p [In Persian].
[17]. Zhang L, Xie Zh, Zhao R, Wang Y. The impact of land use change on soil organic carbon and labile organic carbon stocks in the Long zhong region of Loess Plateau. Jour. Arid Land. 2012; 4(3): 241−250.
[18]. Li Z, Liu C, Dong Y, Chang X, Nie X, Liu L, et al. Response of soil organic carbon and nitrogen stocks to soil erosion and land use types in the Loess hilly–gully region of China. Soil & Tillage Research. 2017; 166, 1-9.
[19]. Ajami M, Heidari A, Khormali F, Gorji M, Ayoubi S. Environmental factors controlling soil organic carbon storage in loess soils of a subhumid region, northern Iran. Geoderma. 2016; 281, 1–10.
[20]. Abegaz A, Winowiecki LA, Vågen TG, Langan S, Smith JU. Spatial and temporal dynamics of soil organic carbon in landscapes of the upper Blue Nile Basin of the Ethiopian Highlands. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2016; 218, 190–208.
دوره 5، شماره 1
فروردین 1397
صفحه 161-172
  • تاریخ دریافت: 04 تیر 1396
  • تاریخ بازنگری: 24 شهریور 1396
  • تاریخ پذیرش: 09 آذر 1396
  • تاریخ اولین انتشار: 01 فروردین 1397