Advertisement
Advertisement

More Related Content

Similar to Carbon and tree diversity in agricultural systems in Nicaragua: do trees really make a difference?(20)

More from CIAT(20)

Advertisement

Carbon and tree diversity in agricultural systems in Nicaragua: do trees really make a difference?

  1. www.ciat.cgiar.org Eco-efficient agriculture for the poor Cali, 06th May 2015 Tree diversity & C sequestration in rural landscapes in sub-humid Central America P. Siles; D. Valbuena; A. Castro; O. Tellez; G. Bonilla; R. van der Hoek
  2. Rural landscapes, degradation & eco-services • Rural landscapes & soils are highly degraded in Central America (82% soils with erosion) • Restoration of these landscapes are key for rural livelihoods & ES provision • Need to co-develop farming systems & rural landscapes that account for ES Constanza et al. 2014
  3. The seasonally dry tropical forest 17 degrees Celsius  rainfall ranging from 250 to 2000 a distinctive seasonality with 4 to 6 dry months
  4. The seasonally dry tropical forest 2-3% of its original extent less of 0.5 % in protected areas 20 percent of its original extent by the mid 1980’s Extensive agriculture 5000 years ago Pasture, maize and beans the predominant agricultural land use highly threatened ecosystem by human activity
  5. Challenges in the Mesoamerican Region SDTF Extensive agriculture Poverty Food security risk Landscape degradation Vulnerability with CC
  6. Agroforestry systems Coffee agroforestry systems Cocoa agroforestry systems High plant species richness Provide product diversification for self-consumption and sale play a very important role in the generation of provisioning ecosystem services Cocoa - AFS Coffee - AFS Smallholder farms: Multi-strata systems a Farmer’s technology Very variable design and Composition
  7. In the sub-humid areas some production systems provide ES Traditional cropping systems Silvopastoral systems Fallows and secondary forest Slash and mulch agroforestry
  8. In the sub-humid areas some production systems provide ES In this study the objective was to assess carbon stock and tree diversity in different land uses AFS with potential to generate ES (plot and landscape level) Carbon Storage and AFS as biological corridors Carbon Stocks Living biomass Litter Death wood biomass Soil carbon
  9. 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Somotillo 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Condega PET 1450 mm Prec 850 mm P/PET=0.58 PET 1900 mm Prec 1700 mm P/PET=0.9 Field sites • Micro watershed Río Pires (Condega): Potrerillos, Santa Teresa, Los Cerritos • Micro watershed Río Tecomapa (Somotillo): La Danta y La Flor • 8 Farms per site (Total 16)
  10. www.ciat.cgiar.org Eco-efficient agriculture for the poor Land uses T1 – Monocrop and burn T2 – Monocrop with traditional varieties T3 – Monocrop + improved varieties T7 – Naturalized pasture T8 – Improved pasture T9 - Silvopastoril + Improved pasture T4 – QSMAS+ traditional varieties T5 - QSMAS+ improved varieties T6 – Secondary forest Land uses monitored for production and ES A farmer participative study Evaluation and design of agroforestry systems Tree species selection TCS NP SPS QSMAS SF
  11. www.ciat.cgiar.org Eco-efficient agriculture for the poor Field measurements 20 m 50 m We identified and measured the diameter at breast height (DBH) of all living woody stems DBH > 2.5 cm We also measured the total height Plot of 0.1 ha 33 m 33 m SF, NP and SPS TCS and QSMAS
  12. www.ciat.cgiar.org Eco-efficient agriculture for the poor Death wood biomass Field measurements Litter biomass Soil sampling Diameter of death wood in the transept Herbs and litter in 0.25 m2 Soil samples 0-20 cm
  13. www.ciat.cgiar.org Eco-efficient agriculture for the poor Data analysis
  14. Land Use Systems TCS NP SPS QSMAS SF Treerichness(species1000m-2 ) 0 5 10 15 20 25 Land Use Systems TCS NP SPS QSMAS SF ShannonIndexH' 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 Results Across all sample sites, species richness ranged from 0 to 39 species/plot The overall pattern of the the Shannon index was the same as that found for species richness
  15. Number of samples 0 5 10 15 20 Speciesrichness 0 20 40 60 80 100 TCS NP SPS QSMAS SF Number of individuals 500 1000 1500 (a) (b) Results SF and QSMAS with the highest species richness accumulation A total 110 tree species found
  16. Results A total 110 tree species found Few species with high relative abundance Species rank 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Relativeabundance(%) 0 5 10 15 20 %P %SPS
  17. Results Species rank 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Relativeabundance(%) 0 5 10 15 20 %P %SPS %QAS %SDF A total 110 tree species found Few species with high relative abundance
  18. Results Greatest similarity between the SF and QSMAS
  19. Land Use Systems TCS NP SPS QSMAS SF TotalabovegroundBiomass(Mgha -1 ) 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Land Use Systems TCS NP SPS QSMAS SF TreeBiomass(Mgha -1 ) 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Results Tree biomass most important compartment in Total AGB
  20. Tree stem density (Individuals ha-1 ) 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 Treeaerialbiomass(Mgha -1 ) 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Stem basal area (m2 ha-1 ) 0 10 20 30 40 50 (a) (b) Results
  21. Land Use Systems TCS NP SPS QSMAS SF Treestemdensity(Individualsha -1 ) 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Land Use Systems TCS NP SPS QSMAS SF Treeaerialbiomass(Mgha -1 ) 0 10 20 30 40 50 < 10 cm 10-20 cm 20-30 cm > 30 cm Results
  22. Land Use Systems TCS NP SPS QSMAS SF -60 -40 -20 0 TotalCarbonstorage(MgCha-1) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Results
  23. Land Use Systems TCS NP SPS QSMAS SF -60 -40 -20 0 TotalCarbonstorage(MgCha-1) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 14 Mg ha-1 33% of SF Results
  24. • Tree biodiversity • Small number of spp accounted for the majority of trees and shrubs • Differences among land uses in species richness and community structure, but QSMAS similar in composition to SF • C stocks • Soils store a large portion of the carbon (even only 20 cm depth) • C stocks in woody biomass the largest compartment of AGB • Forest plots stored on average 46 Mg C ha-1, QSMAS only 33% of SF • Between 30 to 40% of the biomass C was stored in the largest trees (DBH> 30 cm) • Based on average values, C stocks could increase by about 14 Mg C ha-1 by converting cropland to agroforestry Conclusions
  25. • AFS are promising land uses to restore rural landscapes in sub-humid tropics of Central America • Maize-beans AFS plantations with higher C stocks, tree diversity and food production is possible, with no trade-offs • Few examples of successful agroforestry systems in SDTF • Increasing yield in these systems still a challenge • High value products from trees are unexplored (reduce biodiversity and ecological complexity) • Maize-beans AFS and SPS represent a wildlife-friendly farming strategy (corridor and landscape integrity) Final remarks: agroforestry systems on the SDTF
  26. • Compensations • These results could assist to develop mechanism to promote an agriculture with trees • But how to make PES likely in HN, NI or SV? • Compensation through certification also challenging: no like coffee or cocoa (certification), but maybe livestock? • Other mechanisms to incentive the AFS (credits) Final remarks: up/out-scaling of agroforestry systems
  27. www.ciat.cgiar.org Eco-efficient agriculture for the poor Thanks!
  28. Métodos: Parcelas de muestreo 20 m 50 m Vegetacion de arbustos y arboles con dap > 2.5 cm 33 m 33 m Vegetacion de arbustos y arboles con dap > 2.5 cm Bosque, SSPP SAQ, Agricultura
  29. www.ciat.cgiar.org Eco-efficient agriculture for the poor Data analysis
  30. www.ciat.cgiar.org Eco-efficient agriculture for the poor Métodos: Esquema general de trabajo Field measurements Tree measurements Soil and litter Dry Matter and SOM Diversity analysis Biomass stimation by allometric equations Litter C estimation /ha Soil Carbon estimation /ha Total C stock /ha
  31. Métodos: Muestreo de hojarasca y suelos Fase de campo Muestreo de raíces y hojarasca Cinco puntos de muestreo de la hojarasca y las raíces finas por parcela En cada punto de muestreo -Residuos en 0.25 m2 recolectado Suelos 0-10 y 10-20 cm
  32. Land Use Systems Family Tree specie % of the total TCS Boraginaceae Cordia alliodora 26.3 Bignonaceae Tecoma stans 21.1 Burserac eae Bursera simarouba 15.8 Fabaceae Gliricidia sepium 15.8 NP Bignonaceae Tecoma stans 16.8 Boraginaceae Cordia alliodora 15.6 Mimmosaceae Acacia velutina 12.0 Rhamnaceae Karwinskia calderonii 8.4 SPS Rhamnaceae Karwinskia calderonii 18.6 Rhamnaceae Tecoma stans 14.0 Boraginaceae Cordia alliodora 8.4 Simaroubaceae Alvarodoa amorphiodes 6.5 QSMAS Boraginaceae Cordia alliodora 15.0 Fabaceae Lonchocarpus minimifolius 14.5 Rhamnaceae Karwinskia calderonii 13.4 Bignonaceae Tecoma stans 9.0 TSF Mimmosaceae Lysiloma divaricatum 16.6 Bignonaceae Tecoma stans 8.5 Rhamnaceae Karwinskia calderonii 7.9 Ebenaceae Diospyros salicifolia 7.8
  33. Land Use Systems TCS NP SPS QSMAS SF DeathwoodBiomass(Mgha -1 ) 0 1 2 3 4 Land Use Systems TCS NP SPS QSMAS SF Litter+herbsBiomass(Mgha -1 ) 0 1 2 3 4 Results
Advertisement