Mangroves among the most carbon-rich forests in the tropics

Abstract

In the 90´s, Ciénaga Grande de Santa Marta (CGSM) mangroves died due to high levels of salinity in soil. This fact stimulated the reopening of five natural channels to reduce salinity and improve the forests' conditions (PROCIENAGA Project). In order to make a historical evaluation of mangrove rehabilitation trajectories, summarize the lessons learned with the rehabilitation project implemented and to simulate future scenarios; this study used a principal components analysis with hierarchical classification to describe the changes of variables over time, its relationship with the abiotic environment (interstitial salinity and temperature -0.5m, flood level), species composition and structure assembly (age composition, Basal Area-AB and the Importance Value Index-IVI) and ecological functionality (DP-Availability of propagules and Growth Rate-TC) in five stations (Rinconada-RIN, Caño Grande-CGE, Aguas Negras-ANE, Kilómetro 22-KM22 and Luna-LUN). Additionally, to simulate future AB trends, an Individual Based Model (FORMAN) was validated, calibrated and adjusted using monitoring data obtained by INVEMAR. The results suggests a robust analysis methodology; recovery trends of the abiotic conditions in CGE, ANE, KM 22 and LUN and convergence of structural attributes of ANE and KM22, when these where compared to RIN, the reference station. LUN and CGE followed different patterns of structural attributes, this shows that restored stations may take longer to recover desired conditions, and perhaps they may never achieve it. On the other hand, active interventions for restoration are strong enough to switch their path. The DP and CT analysis was restricted due to the high variability in the database, although it showed ecosystem functionality maintenance in all stations. The adjustments in salinity and recruitment rates allow us to calibrate the FORMAN model to CGSM patterns. Under an optimistic scenario, the system will reach stability in a long term (> 100 years) and coexistence of the three mangrove species, with a clear A. germinans dominance. Projecting an increase in interstitial salinity, based on the records of the last three years, the system will collapse in a short term (10 years), showing how vulnerable CGSM is to saline increases and its need for effective management actions implementation. This research opens the door for understanding the patterns and dynamics of restored ecosystem in the long term, and provides inputs and technical basis for planning new restoration strategies, management and modeling in an estuarine complex, which also would be applied to other mangrove ecosystems.

Effects of different management regimes on mangrove ecosystem services in Java, Indonesia

“…However, we note that only a weak correlation exists between above-and belowground storage (e.g. Donato et al 2011), due to the large amount of carbon that accumulates in mangrove soils via other ways than through mangrove growth, i.e. via external sources (Mcleod et al 2011).…”

“…We will here focus on a few key factors, but recommend e.g. studies by Bouillon et al (2008), Donato et al (2011), Kauffman et al (2011), Kauffman et al (2013), for further reading. Differences in biomass storage are explained by age and size, species composition, nutrient availability, tides, waves, temperature and precipitation (Alongi 2012).…”

Spatiotemporal Variation in Mangrove Chlorophyll Concentration Using Landsat 8

“…Estimates suggest that mangrove C storage ranges between ~160 Mg·ha −1 and ~1000 Mg·ha −1 depending on location, species composition, height, and canopy closure [6,7]. Data on C stocks have been published for numerous mangrove systems across the globe including Australia [6], China [8], Indo-Pacific [7,9], Western-Pacific [10], Caribbean [11], and Mexico [12]. In addition, C removal from the atmosphere has been estimated at around 1,170 ± 127 g·C·m −2 ·year −1 [13].…”

Turning the Tide: How Blue Carbon and Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) Might Help Save Mangrove Forests

“…First, their potential as carbon sinks is well documented to exceed most terrestrial forests. Specific to mangroves is the amount of carbon stored below ground (Yee 2010;Donato et al 2011). This characteristic makes mangrove forests uniquely important and suited to avoided deforestation projects.…”

“…Despite their limited extent (approximately 0.7 % of tropical forests), they are globally important carbon sinks because of their efficiency in carbon assimilation and below-ground storage (Donato et al 2011). The gap between the economic value of intact mangrove ecosystems and the value captured by standard market economics (i.e., the market failure) is one of the widest for any ecosystem (Balmford et al 2002).…”