Limits...
Improved grazing management may increase soil carbon sequestration in temperate steppe.

Chen W, Huang D, Liu N, Zhang Y, Badgery WB, Wang X, Shen Y - Sci Rep (2015)

Bottom Line: While deferred grazing (RHM and RMH) sequestered less soil carbon compared to MMM, they showed higher standing root mass, maintained a more desirable pasture composition, and had better ability to retain soil N.Constant high grazing pressure (HHH) caused diminished above- and belowground plant production, more soil N losses and an unfavorable microbial environment and had reduced carbon input.Overall, the soil carbon sequestration in the temperate grassland is affected by the grazing regime that is applied, and grazing can be altered to improve soil carbon sequestration in the temperate steppe.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Grassland Science, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, West Road 2 Yuan Ming Yuan, Beijing 100193, P.R. China.

ABSTRACT
Different grazing strategies impact grassland plant production and may also regulate the soil carbon formation. For a site in semiarid temperate steppe, we studied the effect of combinations of rest, high and moderate grazing pressure over three stages of the growing season, on the process involved in soil carbon sequestration. Results show that constant moderate grazing (MMM) exhibited the highest root production and turnover accumulating the most soil carbon. While deferred grazing (RHM and RMH) sequestered less soil carbon compared to MMM, they showed higher standing root mass, maintained a more desirable pasture composition, and had better ability to retain soil N. Constant high grazing pressure (HHH) caused diminished above- and belowground plant production, more soil N losses and an unfavorable microbial environment and had reduced carbon input. Reducing grazing pressure in the last grazing stage (HHM) still had a negative impact on soil carbon. Regression analyses show that adjusting stocking rate to ~5SE/ha with ~40% vegetation utilization rate can get the most carbon accrual. Overall, the soil carbon sequestration in the temperate grassland is affected by the grazing regime that is applied, and grazing can be altered to improve soil carbon sequestration in the temperate steppe.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

The relationship between stocking rates and soil carbon change (a, solid symbols), soil nitrogen change (b, solid symbols), fungi:bacteria (F:B) (c, solid symbols) and vegetation utilization rate (UR) (a–c, open symbols). Nonlinear relationship: carbon change with stocking rates, solid line y = 4.8 × e(−0.50×((x−4.71)/0.95)2); Nitrogen change with stocking rates, solid line y = –0.06 + 0.22 × e(−0.5×(ln(x/3.92)/0.19)2); F:B ratio with stocking rates, solid line y = 0.27−0.03 × x + 0.002 × x2.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4490272&req=5

f8: The relationship between stocking rates and soil carbon change (a, solid symbols), soil nitrogen change (b, solid symbols), fungi:bacteria (F:B) (c, solid symbols) and vegetation utilization rate (UR) (a–c, open symbols). Nonlinear relationship: carbon change with stocking rates, solid line y = 4.8 × e(−0.50×((x−4.71)/0.95)2); Nitrogen change with stocking rates, solid line y = –0.06 + 0.22 × e(−0.5×(ln(x/3.92)/0.19)2); F:B ratio with stocking rates, solid line y = 0.27−0.03 × x + 0.002 × x2.

Mentions: Further analysis revealed that there is an increase in carbon accumulation, as stocking rate increases, to the biological optimal stocking rate of ~5 SE/ha with ~40% vegetation UR (Fig. 8a). The relationship between nitrogen changes and stocking rates showed a partial decoupling with carbon changes, with the optimal stocking rate at ~4 SE/ha coupled with ~30% vegetation UR (Fig. 8b). The F:B continuously decreased with increased stocking rates (Fig. 8c).


Improved grazing management may increase soil carbon sequestration in temperate steppe.

Chen W, Huang D, Liu N, Zhang Y, Badgery WB, Wang X, Shen Y - Sci Rep (2015)

The relationship between stocking rates and soil carbon change (a, solid symbols), soil nitrogen change (b, solid symbols), fungi:bacteria (F:B) (c, solid symbols) and vegetation utilization rate (UR) (a–c, open symbols). Nonlinear relationship: carbon change with stocking rates, solid line y = 4.8 × e(−0.50×((x−4.71)/0.95)2); Nitrogen change with stocking rates, solid line y = –0.06 + 0.22 × e(−0.5×(ln(x/3.92)/0.19)2); F:B ratio with stocking rates, solid line y = 0.27−0.03 × x + 0.002 × x2.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4490272&req=5

f8: The relationship between stocking rates and soil carbon change (a, solid symbols), soil nitrogen change (b, solid symbols), fungi:bacteria (F:B) (c, solid symbols) and vegetation utilization rate (UR) (a–c, open symbols). Nonlinear relationship: carbon change with stocking rates, solid line y = 4.8 × e(−0.50×((x−4.71)/0.95)2); Nitrogen change with stocking rates, solid line y = –0.06 + 0.22 × e(−0.5×(ln(x/3.92)/0.19)2); F:B ratio with stocking rates, solid line y = 0.27−0.03 × x + 0.002 × x2.
Mentions: Further analysis revealed that there is an increase in carbon accumulation, as stocking rate increases, to the biological optimal stocking rate of ~5 SE/ha with ~40% vegetation UR (Fig. 8a). The relationship between nitrogen changes and stocking rates showed a partial decoupling with carbon changes, with the optimal stocking rate at ~4 SE/ha coupled with ~30% vegetation UR (Fig. 8b). The F:B continuously decreased with increased stocking rates (Fig. 8c).

Bottom Line: While deferred grazing (RHM and RMH) sequestered less soil carbon compared to MMM, they showed higher standing root mass, maintained a more desirable pasture composition, and had better ability to retain soil N.Constant high grazing pressure (HHH) caused diminished above- and belowground plant production, more soil N losses and an unfavorable microbial environment and had reduced carbon input.Overall, the soil carbon sequestration in the temperate grassland is affected by the grazing regime that is applied, and grazing can be altered to improve soil carbon sequestration in the temperate steppe.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Grassland Science, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, West Road 2 Yuan Ming Yuan, Beijing 100193, P.R. China.

ABSTRACT
Different grazing strategies impact grassland plant production and may also regulate the soil carbon formation. For a site in semiarid temperate steppe, we studied the effect of combinations of rest, high and moderate grazing pressure over three stages of the growing season, on the process involved in soil carbon sequestration. Results show that constant moderate grazing (MMM) exhibited the highest root production and turnover accumulating the most soil carbon. While deferred grazing (RHM and RMH) sequestered less soil carbon compared to MMM, they showed higher standing root mass, maintained a more desirable pasture composition, and had better ability to retain soil N. Constant high grazing pressure (HHH) caused diminished above- and belowground plant production, more soil N losses and an unfavorable microbial environment and had reduced carbon input. Reducing grazing pressure in the last grazing stage (HHM) still had a negative impact on soil carbon. Regression analyses show that adjusting stocking rate to ~5SE/ha with ~40% vegetation utilization rate can get the most carbon accrual. Overall, the soil carbon sequestration in the temperate grassland is affected by the grazing regime that is applied, and grazing can be altered to improve soil carbon sequestration in the temperate steppe.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus