Soil carbon stock changes due to afforestation in Japan by the paired sampling method on an equivalent mass basis

• Published in: Biogeochemistry Vol. 153; no. 3; pp. 263 - 281
• Main Authors: Ishizuka, Shigehiro, Hashimoto, Shoji, Kaneko, Shinji, Tsuruta, Kenji, Kida, Kimihiro, Aizawa, Shuhei, Hashimoto, Toru, Ito, Eriko, Umemura, Mitsutoshi, Shinomiya, Yoshiki, Morishita, Tomoaki, Noguchi, Kyotaro, Ono, Kenji, Okamoto, Toru, Mizoguchi, Takeo, Torii, Atsushi, Sakai, Hisao, Inagaki, Yoshiyuki, Shichi, Koji, Toriyama, Jumpei, Sakai, Yoshimi, Inagaki, Masahiro, Shirato, Yasuhito, Obara, Hiroshi, Kohyama, Kazunori, Takata, Yuusuke, Katayanagi, Nobuko, Kanda, Takashi, Inoue, Haruna, Kusaba, Takashi
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Cham Springer International Publishing 01.04.2021; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Absorption coefficient; Absorptivity; Afforestation; Agricultural land; Annual precipitation; Biogeosciences; Carbon; Deforestation; Earth and Environmental Science; Earth Sciences; Ecosystems; Environmental Chemistry; Equivalence; Grasslands; Land use; Life Sciences; Mass; Phosphates; Sampling; Sampling methods; Soil; Soils; Japan; Paired sampling; Equivalent mass; Afforestation; Japan; Land-use change; Soil carbon
• ISSN: 0168-2563; 1573-515X
• DOI: 10.1007/s10533-021-00786-8

To identify the soil carbon stock changes from croplands/grasslands to forestlands in Japan, we compared the soil carbon stock of a cropland/grassland with that of an adjacent forestland at 22 different sites. With respect to a 0–30-cm depth basis, the soil carbon stock in the cropland/grassland was the same as that in the forestland; however, it was less than that in the forestland when an equivalent mass approach was used. The ratio of the soil carbon stock in the forestland to that in the cropland/grassland was 1.11 on average, which is comparable with previous mass-corrected paired sampling studies. The ratio was affected by two factors: tree age and current vegetation. Mean annual temperature, mean annual precipitation, phosphate absorption coefficient, litter quantity, and former land use did not affect the ratio. According to a comparison with the results of a paired study for deforestation, the application of the reciprocal of the soil carbon stock ratio of deforestation to the ratio of afforestation was slightly overestimated. Further studies are necessary to establish a general conclusion. Some previous studies, including those involving non-mass-corrected data, are possibly biased, and more studies using the paired sampling method with equivalent mass basis must be conducted to provide the general factor for soil carbon stock change in the future.