Greenhouse-gas budget of soils under changing climate and land use (BurnOut) • COST 639 • 2006-2010
25
Land-use change and management effects on soil
carbon sequestration: Forestry and agriculture
L. VESTERDAL1 and J. LEIFELD2
1Forest
and Landscape Denmark, University of Copenhagen, Hørsholm, Denmark
Reckenholz-Tänikon Research Station ART, Zürich, Switzerland
2Agroscope
Introduction
The commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol and
the associated reporting requirements are coming
closer, and the need for more knowledge on effects
of land-use change is high on the agenda in most
signatory countries to the protocol. There is a
direct need to report effects on soil C from changes
between forest land, cropland and grassland.
Moreover, there is a need to quantify the potential
of different management options within land uses.
This is needed to document that forest soils are not
a source for greenhouse gases or to even document
monitored changes in soil C and may eventually
enable countries to engage in more advanced
inventories of soil C based on modelling.
Working group 2 of Cost Action 639 will address
the effects of land-use changes and effects of
management within land uses. More specifically,
the working group will aim to synthesize knowledge on changes in soil C and N stocks and their
drivers following land-use change and management change in order to support better reporting
of green house gas emissions from soils.
Focus will be on relevant combinations of land
use and management that are expected to be most
conducive to C and N stock changes, e.g. afforestation of former cropland, cropland-grassland
changes, reduced tillage.
During the recent years, there has been some
effort to review and summarize effects of land-use
change and forest management, partly based on
meta analysis (e.g. Post and Kwon, 2000; Guo and
Gifford, 2002; Paul et al., 2002; Johnson and Curtis,
2001; Jandl et al., 2007a). However, much uncertainty still remains. Especially there appears to be
little knowledge on the influence of significant
interacting factors such as land use history, soil
type, climate, etc. These interacting factors may
currently contribute to the large variability
observed in effects of land use and management
change on soil C stocks. In addition, many studies
rely on soil data that were not designated as a reference for changes in SOC. Typical shortcomings are
shallow sampling depth that fail to account for
changes occurring also in the deeper soil (e.g.
Mikhailova et al. 2000), or missing measurements
of bulk densities, coarse soil fractions and stones,
and calculations of equivalent soil masses.
This aim of this paper is to highlight some of the
relevant combinations of land use and management that are expected to be most conducive to C
stock changes within forestry and agriculture.
Furthermore we will list some of the knowledge
gaps that were identified within the first meeting of
WG2 and during a subsequent questionnaire evaluation among WG2 participants.
Forest-related land-use change: afforestation
Comparison of soil C stocks in land uses forestry
and arable land have generally shown that forest
soils contain most C (e.g. Lettens et al., 2005a).
Based on such land use differences and by observed
decreases in soil C following change from forestry
to agriculture it has been inferred that the reverse
change, e.g. by afforestation of cropland, can
enhance the soil C stock through C sequestration
(Lal, 2005). However, the question remains if the
legacy of contemporary intensive agriculture (e.g.
high N status and liming) will enable recovery of C
stocks after afforestation?
This question was one of the drivers for a study of
afforestation chronosequences on former cropland
in NW Europe (Vesterdal et al., 2007a). The
26
Greenhouse-gas budget of soils under changing climate and land use (BurnOut) • COST 639 • 2006-2010
AFFOREST project evaluated C sequestration in
biomass and soils following afforestation of cropland. Two oak (Quercus robur) and four Norway
spruce (Picea abies) afforestation chronosequences
(age range 1 to 90 years) were studied with respect
to C sequestration in Denmark, Sweden and the
Netherlands. For the total soil compartment
studied, i.e. forest floor and mineral soil 0-25 cm,
afforestation of cropland as a minimum resulted in
unchanged soil C contents and in most cases led to
net C sequestration. Rates of soil C sequestration
ranged from being negligible in two of the Danish
chronosequences to 1.3 Mg C ha-1 yr-1 for the
Dutch chronosequence. The allocation of
sequestered soil C was also quite different among
chronosequences. While forest floor development
consistently led to C sequestration, there was no
general pattern in mineral soil C sequestration. In
the short term (30 years), oak and spruce differed
little in their influence on total soil C sequestration.
Afforestation of nutrient-poor sandy soils seemed
to result in larger C sequestration in forest floors
and the whole soil than afforestation of nutrientrich, clayey soils. For the afforested ecosystem as a
whole, the general contribution of soils to C sequestration (i.e. to a net gain in C stock) was about one
third of the total C sequestration. The contribution
of soil varied among the chronosequences from
none to 31% of the total C sequestered.
During recent years, global studies of afforestation effects on soil C has been reviewed and
synthesized by meta-analyses (e.g. Post and Kwon,
2000; Guo and Gifford, 2002; Paul et al., 2002;
Jandl et al., 2007a). The average rate of soil C
sequestration following afforestation was 0.3 t
C/ha/yr (range 0-3 t C/ha/yr) across different
climatic zones (Post & Kwon, 2000). On average
afforestation increases total soil C stocks by 18%
over a variable number of years (Guo and Gifford,
2002). The initial soil C accumulation occurs in the
forest floor, and its thickness and chemical properties vary with tree species (Vesterdal and RaulundRasmussen, 1998). A contribution of soils of
between 15 and 20% of total ecosystem C sequestration appears to be a common picture for
afforestation of former cropland (Vesterdal et al.,
2007a). However, some of the chronosequences
reported in literature had lower relative total soil
contribution because there were no changes or
even a decrease in mineral soil C stock.
Fig. 1 shows a compilation of 15 afforestation
chronosequence studies from temperate regions,
mainly on former cropland (studies compiled by
Vesterdal et al., 2007a and Jandl et al., 2007b).
There is quite substantial variability in rates of C
sequestration following afforestation (Fig. 1a).
Estimated rates of C sequestration may vary
between studies due to different extent of
chronosequences. For instance very few chronosequence data are available for estimation of C
sequestration over a full forest rotation following
afforestation. For these 15 chronosequences, there
was no clear pattern in C sequestration rate related
to the extent of the chronosequence.
The large variation between studies may also be
due to different allocation of sequestered C within
Figure 1.
Variability in a) soil C sequestration rates and b) rates of C sequestration in forest floor, mineral soil and the
two compartments combined (total soil) based on 15 different afforestation chronosequences in a temperate climate. Bars indicate SEM. Studies compiled by Vesterdal et al. (2007a) and Jandl et al. (2007b).
Greenhouse-gas budget of soils under changing climate and land use (BurnOut) • COST 639 • 2006-2010
the soil profile. Carbon sequestration rates in the
forest floor are fairly similar among many
chronosequences (0.3-0.4 Mg C ha-1 yr-1, Fig. 1b).
The contribution of the mineral soil to total soil C
sequestration varies tremendously among the
studied chronosequences and in some cases
mineral soils even lost C after afforestation (Fig.
1b). The relative contribution of soils and also the
partitioning of C between forest floor and mineral
soil are probably strongly influenced by interacting
factors such as climate, soil type, tree species,
former agricultural land use, length of the
chronosequence, and sampling methodology.
These factors vary between most of the 15
chronosequences.
Effects of forest management
Effects of forest management on soil C stocks are
generally not well known. Changes in soil C stocks
following from management of forests that existed
prior to 1990 will be accounted for under art. 3.4 of
the Kyoto Protocol. A few attempts have recently
been done to synthesize effects of various forest
management actions on soil C (Johnson and
Curtis, 2001; Jandl et al., 2007a). This paper lists
forest management parameters which are expected
to be most conducive to changes in soil C stocks.
European forest management is characterized by
extensive use of introduced tree species, especially
in the western and southern regions. Selection of
tree species is therefore often an integrated part of
management options, whereas forestry in other
regions to a greater extent relies on native species.
In these regions there may also be an effect of the
current trend of converting coniferous forests back
to the more site-adapted deciduous forest types
(Jandl et al., 2007b). It is well known that tree
species strongly influence the forest floor in terms
of C stock and chemistry (Binkley, 1995; Vesterdal
and Raulund-Rasmussen, 1998), but the effect of
tree species on mineral soils or the whole soil
profile remains inconclusive (Jandl et al., 2007a).
Most conclusions regarding tree species effects on
soil C is therefore based on studies of forest floor C
accumulation. However, results of recent studies
(Oostra et al., 2006; Vesterdal et al., 2007b) lead to
the question if the soil C stock does in fact differ
under different tree species or if the C stock just
tends to be differently distributed between forest
floor and mineral soil. In the latter two studies,
27
there was an opposite trend between C stocks in
the forest floor and mineral soil, which might be
attributed to differences in downwards transportation or rhizodeposition of C.
Thinning intensity as reflected by the level of
stem basal area has been reported to influence
forest floor C stocks in European Norway spruce
stands (Vesterdal et al., 1995; Slodicak et al., 2005;
Jonard et al., 2006). Carbon stocks are largest in
weakly thinned stands, but the influence of thinning intensity appears somewhat limited compared
to site-related differences (Vesterdal et al., 1995).
The decrease in forest floor C has been attributed
partially to faster decomposition of needle litter as
the microclimate is more favourable in heavily
thinned stands, i.e. higher temperatures and higher
soil moisture (Aussenac, 1987). The effect of thinning intensity has also been attributed to
decreasing production of needle litter with
increasing thinning grade (Slodicak et al., 2005). In
contrast to the forest floor C pool, there is
currently little evidence of changes in the mineral
soil with different thinning regime (Skovsgaard et
al., 2006). More than one stand rotation may be
required to substantially influence the mineral soil
C pool by reduced thinning intensity. The effect of
thinning intensity on more stable C fractions
therefore appears limited within the time perspective of a forest stand.
During the last decades, forestry in several European countries has initiated a change in harvesting
system of deciduous forests toward nature-based or
continuous cover forestry (Pommerening and
Murphy, 2004). This management form is inspired
by natural temperate deciduous forests where
disturbance occurs down to the single tree level, i.e.
there is almost continuous crown cover over time.
There is currently little knowledge of the influence
of this change in management on soil C stocks. An
important characteristic in nature-based forestry is
the more continuous canopy cover or at least the
smaller and less long-lasting openings in the forest
canopy associated with the regeneration phase.
The input of organic matter to soils will be more
continuous compared to traditional clearcutting/
replanting systems. As forest climate is better
maintained, less C is probably also lost from soils
by decomposition compared to the clearcutting
system, where the soil C stock decreases in the
period following clearcutting and replanting
(Covington, 1981; Yanai, 2000; Heinsdorf , 2002).
Elongation of the rotation period within the
28
Greenhouse-gas budget of soils under changing climate and land use (BurnOut) • COST 639 • 2006-2010
clearcutting system may also have a positive influence on soil C. Soils will be prone to less frequent
disturbances, thereby possibly conserving larger C
stocks than in traditionally managed forests.
The drainage regime of large forest areas is
currently changed by ditching in order to facilitate
the growth of tree species that require more welldrained soil conditions. Today, there is less focus
on keeping up wood production in small swamps
while there is increasing focus on maintenance of
habitat diversity in forests. This has resulted in
passive or active restoration of natural hydrology.
A change in drainage regime toward wetter conditions may be the most significant management
action in terms of soil C sequestration. Decomposition of organic matter proceeds slowly under
anoxic conditions, and soil C stocks may therefore
differ by several hundred tonnes per ha between
well-drained and wet soils (Krogh et al., 2003). It is
therefore likely to expect that wetland restoration
would enhance the soil C stock through C sequestration. The more wet conditions can enhance C
stocks in the soil compartment, thus increasing the
CO2 mitigation potential of forest soils. However,
emissions of other greenhouse gases like N2O and
methane (CH4) are also enhanced in wet soils, and
the risk of pollution swapping, i.e. forests
becoming a source for other greenhouse gases,
could be a threat to the mitigation effect. There is a
strong need for quantification of net greenhouse
gas emissions following restored hydrology and to
refine management in order to mitigate emissions
of N2O and CH4.
Management actions other than those discussed
above may also influence soil C stocks, e.g. rotation
period and fertilization. Table 1 provides a
summary of different management actions and the
specific actions expected to enhance soil C stocks.
Agriculturally related land-use change
Conversion from grassland to cropland
Grasslands typically store higher amounts of SOC
than croplands under otherwise similar site conditions because of i) higher residue inputs and ii)
reduced turnover. In addition, more favourable
conditions for soil biota under grassland enhance
the soils structural stability and thus the physical
protection of SOM even when the cropland is
manured (Blair et al., 2006). Conversion of cropland to grassland is thus regarded as a SOC sequestration measure (Post and Kwon, 2000). However,
the net effect depends much on the specific
management, and crop rotations with high residue
returns and long periods of soil coverage may
outperform extensively used grasslands with low
productivity. For example, conversion from a
seven-year crop rotation to a non-fertilized hay
meadow did not result in a net C uptake of the
temperate grassland within the first few years
(Ammann et al., 2007). Because the conversion
effect is determined by the difference in SOC
stocks between the two land-use types, and
because C stocks are strongly climate-and soil
dependent, stock change rates matching the
regional climate and soil conditions are superior to
default values in terms of accuracy and reliability.
Peatland drainage and cultivation
Between 56 and 65% of the wetlands in North
America and Europe, many of them peatlands,
have been drained for intensive agriculture
(OECD, 1996). Peatlands in Europe underwent
extensive drainage and cultivation since medieval
times. As a consequence of drainage, subsidence
caused by peat shrinkage and oxidation has shaped
many landscapes mainly in northern Europe. The
Table 1.
A summary of some relevant management parameters and the specific actions expected to promote
C sequestration in soils.
Management parameter
How to increase soil C stocks?
Tree species selection
Difficult to generalize for the whole soil profile
Thinning intensity
Low intensity
Drainage regime
Wet - but beware of N2O and CH4
Harvesting - clearcutting vs. continuous cover
Continuous cover
Rotation period
Extended -longer period with less disturbance
Fertilization
N fertilization
Greenhouse-gas budget of soils under changing climate and land use (BurnOut) • COST 639 • 2006-2010
corresponding losses of CO2, but also N2O, are
large compared to those found in mineral soils and
depend much on land-use and tillage (KasimirKlemedtsson et al., 1997). Though methane emissions are eliminated when the peat becomes oxic,
the full GHG balance of a drained peatland is often
likely to be negative (i.e. a source) even in the
longer term (Leifeld, 2006). The ability to restore
degraded peatlands not only hydrological but also
in terms of their C sink capacity is a major current
challenge.
Effects of agricultural management
Soil tillage
Soil tillage and periods of bare soil increase the
aeration and change the climate (temperature,
moisture) of the topsoil and thus often accelerate
SOM decomposition rates (Balesdent et al., 2000).
Conservation or no-till is thus considered as a
measure to sequester C (eg. Holland, 2004; Paustian et al., 1997) and many experiments have
proven an increase in SOC in the topsoil. On the
other hand, there is experimental evidence that no
till does not change the total soil C stock quantitatively but rather its distribution with depth (e.g.
Powlson and Jenkinson, 1981; Angers et al., 1997).
Based on these contradictory findings it has been
argued that soil sampling deeper than the
commonly applied 20 to 30 cm is necessary to
capture the overall effect on soil C (Baker et al.,
2007). Revisiting the current paradigm of no-till by
using more field data with deeper sampling is an
urgent need to gain a better understanding of the
net effect of tillage on soil C for different climatic
zones and soil types. Carbon sequestration is only
one out of many relevant topics related to soil
tillage. Others include erosion control and soil
structure, emissions of N2O, energy consumption
for tillage, weed control, or moisture retention.
Inputs from crop residues and organic fertilizers
Organic matter input and turnover rates are the
drivers for the soils carbon stock. The major crops
in Europe differ largely in their yield and correspondingly also in the amount of residues and the
extent of soil coverage they provide. Increases in
soil carbon stocks were shown for the introduction
of leys (Smith et al., 1997) or for rotations
including winter cover crops that provide addi-
29
tional residue inputs and at the same time serve as
a protection against erosion (Lal et al., 1999). Not
only crop rotation, but also the management of
crop residues is prone to continuous adaptation.
For example, burning of crop residues on the field
has been common practice in many countries after
the Second World War, but has been dropped
during recent times. Another factor of utmost
importance is the systematic increase in productivity during the last decades along with the
increased use of mineral fertilizers and improved
tillage practices, pest control, irrigation, and the
continuous introduction of new varieties. In a
remarkable long-term study from Missouri, USA,
Buyanovsky and Wagner (1998) showed that the
total net annual production of winter wheat and
maize increased by a factor of two to three during
the last century. The corresponding amounts of
carbon returned annually to the soil even increased
by a factor of around three for wheat and five to six
for maize, switching the system from a SOC source
during the first decades of the field trial to a sink
since 1950. They also proved that the total amount
of SOC (0-100 cm) was linearly related to the
amount of carbon applied during the duration of
the experiment (100 years).
Numerous studies have shown the beneficial
effect of organic residues such as manure on the
soils’ carbon content (e.g. Smith et al., 1997) and
that such an accumulation may be long-lasting
(Jenkinson, 1988). In contrast it has been argued,
that there is no net sequestration effect from
manuring because spreading organic residues
simply means a re-distribution of resources or, in
simple words, the non-manured soil will become
depleted over time (Schlesinger, 1999). While there
seems to be pros and cons for the positive effect of
manure, the discussion so far highlights the need
for a clear definition of the system border. For agriculture, where re-distribution of organic matter in
the form of crop residue, organic fertilizer, or as
imported fodder or concentrate is an integral part
of the management, net effects on SOC cannot be
claimed without consideration of the fluxes into
and out of the system (i.e., field, farm, or region).
Data from Belgium (Lettens et al. 2005b) indicated
that changes in the amount and allocation of
manure had pronounced effects on the C stocks in
northern Belgium over the last 40 years or so and
that, among others, legal restriction on manure
application was one of the key drivers.
30
Greenhouse-gas budget of soils under changing climate and land use (BurnOut) • COST 639 • 2006-2010
Grassland management
Grasslands vary widely in their carbon content,
and type (haying, grazing) and intensity of grassland use both exert influence on the soils C stock.
Grazing influences SOC stocks via changes in plant
productivity, root allocation of plant C, changes in
species composition and changes in physical soil
properties. Grazing has been reported to produce
positive effects on grassland soil C (Mestdagh et al.,
2006). Increases in SOC levels under grazing, as
compared with mowing, can be attributed to i) a
higher return of ingested nutrients to the pasture
as excreta (60 -95%, Schnabel et al., 2001), ii)
enhanced physical breakdown and soil incorporation of plant materials, which accumulate in
ungrazed exclosures as standing dead and surface
litter (Manley et al., 1995) and iii) a more rapid
annual shoot turnover (Reeder and Schuman,
2002). Heavier foot traffic results in enhanced
breakdown of aboveground litter and its incorporation into the soil (Schuman et al., 2001).
However, overgrazing will result in damage to the
vegetation cover, leading to C losses from soil
erosion. Although grazing tends to increase SOC
stocks compared with types of management that
do not involve livestock, the results are far from
being consistent, and several studies indicate
carbon losses due to grazing (Potter et al., 2001).
Improved grassland productivity is expected to
increase soil C stocks because of higher inputs. Lal
et al. (1997) reported a higher NPP for fertilised
than for unfertilised grassland, leading to a higher
residue input. This effect was more pronounced in
the presence of grasses than with legumes. Nyborg
et al. (1997) reported increases in SOC due to a
higher NPP with increasing N and S fertilisation.
They also showed that the light organic fraction
was much more responsive to different mineral
fertiliser application rates than total SOC. In a
review of 115 studies, Conant et al. (2001) showed
that conversion of native to cultivated grassland led
to a mean relative annual increase in SOC. Using
13C pulse-labelling, Crawford et al. (1997) found
that grass cutting resulted in lower above-ground
NPP compared with the uncut control, but in a
higher allocation of assimilated C to roots. This
may lead to higher soil C stocks in the long term.
As for other land-use and management options, the
effects of grassland management on SOC cannot be
evaluated without consideration of other underlying drivers such as land-use history, soil texture, or
hydrology (Mestdagh et al., 2006).
Data and knowledge gaps - as reflected by
discussions and a questionnaire within
Working Group 2
Data gaps:
1. What is the land-use history of the site and
what are the effects of land-use history on
current C-dynamics?
2. Area information on the extent of land-use
and management change incl. drainage of
peatlands and depth of peat exploitation
3. Pedotransfer functions to calculate stocks from
concentration data for different land-use types
4. Matter fluxes (residues, manure) at the farm
scale
5. Initialization of SOC models: What are the
starting conditions; not enough data for
residue and organic fertilizer input
6. Interaction between changing C- and N-stocks
and fluxes of other GHGs
7. Lack of data in particular on Mediterranean
and high-elevation soils
Knowledge gaps:
1. Influence of site factors interacting with landuse change
2. Time to reach new steady state in SOC; is the
concept of a steady-state for SOC valid at all?
3. How do the different soil carbon fractions
contribute to the source-sink function?
4. What is the role of black carbon as a deposit
for recalcitrant C?
5. Mediterranean region: Will land after abandonment degrade or accumulate C? Dynamic
of CaCO3 in agriculture is unknown during
degradation and succession of vegetation.
6. Effect of energy crops on soil properties incl.
SOC
7. Effect of soil sealing on SOC
8. Effect of climate change on carbon stocks in
mountain regions: Both data and process
understanding are scarce
9. N2O and CH4 fluxes - is pollution swapping
following restoration of wetlands a threat?
Greenhouse-gas budget of soils under changing climate and land use (BurnOut) • COST 639 • 2006-2010
References
Ammann, C., Flechard, C., Leifeld, J., Neftel, A. and Fuhrer, J.,
2007. The carbon budget of newly established temperate
grassland depends on management intensity. Agriculture,
Ecosystems and Environment 121: 5-20.
Angers, D.A., Bolinder, M.A., Carter, M.R., Gregorich, E.G.,
Drury, C.F., Liang, B.C., Voroney, R.P., Simard, R.R.,
Donald, R.G., Beyaert, R.P., and Martel, J. 1997. Impact
of tillage practices on organic carbon and nitrogen storage in cool, humid soils of eastern Canada. Soil & Tillage
Research 41: 191-201.
Aussenac, G., 1987. Effets de l’éclaircie sur l’écophysiologie des
peuplements forestiers. Schweizerische Zeitschrift für
Forstwesen 138: 685-700.
Baker, J.M., Ochsner, T.E., Venterea, R.T. and Griffis, T.J. 2007.
Tillage and soil carbon sequestration - what do we really
know? Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment 118: 1-5.
Balesdent, J., Chenu, C., and Balabane, M. 2000. Relationship
of soil organic matter dynamics to physical protection
and tillage. Soil & Tillage Research 53: 215-230.
Binkley, D., 1995. The influence of tree species on forest soils:
Processes and patterns. In: Mead, D.J., Cornforth, I.S.
(Eds.), Proceeding of the Trees and Soil Workshop, Lincoln University 28 February-2 March 1994. Lincoln University Press, Canterbury, pp. 1-33.
Blair, N., Faulkner, R.D., Till, A.R., Korschens, M., and Schulz,
E. 2006. Long-term management impacts on soil C, N
and physical fertility - Part II: Bad Lauchstädt Static and
Extreme Fym Experiments. Soil & Tillage Research 91:
39-47.
Buyanovsky, G.A. and Wagner, G.H. 1998. Carbon cycling in
cultivated land and its global significance, Global Change
Biology 4: 131-141.
Conant, R.T., Paustian, K., and Elliott, E.T. 2001. Grassland
management and conversion into grassland: Effects on
soil carbon. Ecological Applications 11: 343-355.
Covington, W.W., 1981. Changes in forest floor organic matter
and nutrient content following clear cutting in northern
hardwoods. Ecology 62: 41-48.
Crawford, M.C., Grace, P.r., Oades, J.M.,1997. Effect of defoliation of medic pastures on below-ground carbon allocation and root production. In: Lal, R., Kimble, J., Follett,
R.F., Stewart, B.A. (eds.): Management of carbon sequestration in soil, pp. 381-389. CRC Press, Boca Raton.
31
Jandl, R., Lindner, M., Vesterdal, L., Bauwens, B., Baritz, R.,
Hagedorn, F., Johnson, D.W., Minkkinen, K., Byrne,
K.A., 2007a. How strongly can forest management influence soil carbon sequestration? Geoderma 137: 253-268.
Jandl, R., Vesterdal, L., Olsson, M., Bens, O., Badeck, F., Rock, J.,
2007b. Carbon sequestration and forest management .
CAB Reviews: Perspectives in Agriculture, Veterinary Science, Nutrition and Natural Resources 2, No. 017. 16pp.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1079/PAVSNNR20072017
Jenkinson, D.S. 1988. Soil organic matter and its dynamics.
In:Russell’s Soil Conditions and Plant Growth, 11th edn
(ed. A. Wild), pp. 564-607. Longman, London.
Johnson, D.W., Curtis, P.S., 2001. Effects of forest management
on soil C and N storage: meta analysis. For. Ecol. Manage.
140: 227-238.
Jonard, M., Misson, L., Ponette, Q., 2006. Long-term thinning
effects on the forest floor and the foliar nutrient status of
Norway spruce stands in the Belgian Ardennes. Cam. J.
For. Res. 36: 2684-2695.
Kasimir-Klemedtsson A, Klemedtsson L, Berglund K, Martikainen P, Silvola J, and Oenema, O., 1997. Greenhouse
gas emissions from farmed organic soils: a review. Soil
Use and Land Management 13: 245-250
Krogh, L., Nørgaard, A., Hermansen, M., Greve, M. H., Balstrøm,
T., Breuning-Madsen, H., 2003. Preliminary estimates of
contemporary soil organic carbon stocks in Denmark
using multiple datasets and four scaling-up methods. Agriclture, Ecosystems & Environment 96: 19-28.
Lal, R., Henderlong, P., Flowers, M., 1997b. Forages and row
cropping effects on soil organic carbon and nitrogen contents. In: Lal, R., Kimble, J., Follett, R.F., Stewart, B.A.
(eds.): Management of carbon sequestration in soil, pp.
365-379. CRC Press, Boca Raton.
Lal, R., 2005. Forest soils and carbon sequestration. For. Ecol.
Manage. 220: 242-258.
Lal, R., Follett, R.F., Kimble, J., and Cole, C.V. 1999. Managing
US cropland to sequester carbon in soil. Journal of Soil
and Water Conservation 54: 374-381.
Leifeld, J., 2006. Soils as sources and sinks of greenhouse gases.
In: Frossard, E., Blum, W.E.H. and Wark-entin, B. (eds.):
Functions of soils for human societies and the environment. Geological Society, London, Special Publications,
266: 23-44.
Guo, L. B., Gifford, R. M. 2002. Soil carbon stocks and land use
change: a meta analysis. Global Change Biology 8: 345360.
Lettens, S., Van Orshoven, J., van Wesemael, B., De Vos, B., Muys,
B., 2005a. Stocks and fluxes of soil organic carbon for landscape units in Belgium derived from heterogeneous data
sets for 1990 and 2000. Geoderma 127: 11-23.
Heinsdorf, D., 2002. Einfluss der Bewirtschaftung auf den Kohlenstoffhaushalt von Forstökosystemen on Nordostdeutschen Tiefland. Beitr. Forstwirtsch. u. Landsch. ökol. 36:
168-174.
Lettens, S., Van Orshoven, J., Van Wesemael, B., Muys, B., and
Perrin, D. 2005b. Soil organic carbon changes in landscape units of Belgium between 1960 and 2000 with reference to 1990, Global Change Biology 11: 2128-2140.
Holland, J.M. 2004. The environmental consequences of adopting conservation tillage in Europe: reviewing the evidence. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment 103: 1-25.
Manley, J.T., Schuman, G.E., Reeder, J.D. and Hart, R.H., 1995.
Rangeland soil carbon and nitrogen responses to grazing. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 50: 294-298.
32
Greenhouse-gas budget of soils under changing climate and land use (BurnOut) • COST 639 • 2006-2010
Mestdagh, I., Lootens, P., Van Cleemput, O., and Carlier, L. 2006.
Variation in organic carbon concentration and bulk density in Flemish grassland soils. Journal of Plant Nutrition
and Soil Science 169: 616-622.
Mikhailova, E.A., Bryant, R.B., Vassenev, I.I., Schwager, S.J., and
Post, C.J. 2000. Cultivation effects on soil carbon and nitrogen contents at depth in the Russian Chernozem. Soil
Science Society of America Journal 64: 738-745.
Nyborg, M., Molina-Ayala, M., Solberg, E.D., Izaurralde, R.C.,
Malhi, S.S., Janzen, H.H., 1997. Carbon storage in grassland soils as related to N and S fertilizers. In: Lal, R., Kimble, J., Follett, R.F., Stewart, B.A. (eds.): Management of
carbon sequestration in soil, pp. 421-432. CRC Press,
Boca Raton.
OECD. 1996. Guidelines for aid agencies for improved conservation and sustainable use of tropical and subtropical
wetlands. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development, Paris.
Oostra, S., Majdi, H., Olsson, M., 2006. Impact of tree species
on soil carbon stocks and soil acidity in southern Sweden. Scand. J. For. Res. 21: 364-371.
Paul, K. I., Polglase, P. J., Nyakuengama, J. G., Khanna, P. K.,
2002. Change in soil carbon following afforestation. Forest Ecology and Management 168: 241-257.
Paustian, K., Andren, O., Janzen, H.H., Lal, R., Smith, P., Tian,
G., Tiessen, H., Van Noordwijk, M., and Woomer, P.L.
1997. Agricultural soils as a sink to mitigate CO2 emissions. Soil Use and Management 13: 230-244.
Skovsgaard, J.P., Stupak, I., Vesterdal, L., 2006. Distribution of
biomass and carbon in evenaged stands of Norway
spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.): A case study on spacing
and thinning effects in northern Denmark. Scand. J. For.
Res. 21: 470-488.
Slodicak, M., Novak, J., Skovsgaard, J.P., 2005. Wood production, litter fall and humus accumulation in a Czech thinning experiment in Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.)
Karst.). For. Ecol. Manage. 209: 157-166.
Smith, P., Powlson, D.S., Glendining, M.J., and Smith, J.U. 1997.
Potential for carbon sequestration in European soils: Preliminary estimates for five scenarios using results from
long-term experiments. Global Change Biology 3: 67-79.
Vesterdal, L., Dalsgaard, M., Felby, C., Raulund-Rasmussen, K.,
Jørgensen, B.B., 1995. Effects of thinning and soil properties on accumulation of carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus in the forest floor of Norway spruce stands. For.
Ecol. Manage. 77: 1-10.
Vesterdal, L., Schmidt, I.K., Callesen, I., Nilsson, L.O., Gundersen, P., 2007b. Carbon and nitrogen in forest floor and
mineral soil under six common European tree species.
For. Ecol. Manage. (submitted).
Vesterdal, L., Raulund-Rasmussen, K., 1998. Forest floor chemistry under seven tree species along a soil fertility gradient. Can. J. For. Res. 28: 1636-1647.
Post, W. M., Kwon, K. C., 2000. Soil carbon sequestration and
land-use change: processes and potential. Global Change
Biol. 6: 317-327.
Vesterdal L., Rosenqvist L., van der Salm C., Hansen K., Groenenberg B.-J., Johansson M.-B., 2007a. Carbon sequestration in soil and biomass following afforestation:
experiences from oak and Norway spruce chronosequences in Denmark, Sweden and the Netherlands. In:
Heil G., Muys B., Hansen K. Environmental Effects of Afforestation in North-Western Europe - From Field Observations to Decision Support. Springer, Plant and
Vegetation 1: 19-52.
Potter, K.N., Daniel, J.A., Altorn, W., and Torbert, H.A., 2001.
Stocking rate effect on soil carbon and nitrogen in degraded soils. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 56:
233-236.
Yanai, R. D., Arthur, M. A., Siccama, T. G., Federer, C. A., 2000.
Challenges of measuring forest floor organic matter dynamics: Repeated measures from a chronosequence. For.
Ecol. Man. 138: 273-283.
Pommerening, A., Murphy, S.T., 2004. A review of the history,
definitions and methods of continuous cover forestry
with special attention to afforestation and restocking.
Forestry 77: 27-44.
Powlson, D.S. and Jenkinson, D.S. 1981. A comparison of the
organic matter, biomass, Adenosine- Triphosphate and
mineralizable nitrogen contents of ploughed and directdrilled Soils. Journal of Agricultural Science 97: 713-721.
Reeder, J.D., and Schuman, G.E., 2002. Influence of livestock
grazing on C sequestration in semi-arid mixed-grass and
short-grass rangelands. Environmental Pollution 116:
457-463.
Schlesinger, W.H. 1999. Carbon sequestration in soils. Science
284: 2095.
Schnabel, R.R., Franzluebbers, A.J., Stout, W.L., Sanderson,
M.A. and Stuedemann, J.A., 2001. The effects of pasture
management practices. In: Follett, R.F., Kimble, J.M. and
Lal, R. (eds.): The potential of U.S. grazing lands to sequester carbon and mitigate the greenhouse effect; pp.
291-322. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, Fl.
Schuman, G.E., Herrick, J.E. and Janzen, H.H., 2001. The dynamics of soil carbon in rangelands. In: Follett, R.F., Kimble, J.M. and Lal, R. (eds.): The potential of U.S. grazing
lands to sequester carbon an mitigate the greenhouse effect; pp. 267-290. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, Fl.
Authors:
Lars Vesterdal
Forest & Landscape Denmark
University of Copenhagen
Hørsholm Kongevej 11
DK-2970 Hørsholm, Denmark
Phone: +45 35281672
E-Mail: [email protected]
Jens Leifeld
Agroscope ReckenholzTänikon Research Station ART
Air Pollution / Climate Group
Reckenholzstrasse 191, CH-8046 Zurich
Phone: +41(0)44 3777 510
E-Mail: [email protected]