Search

• Soil organic carbon (SOC) stabilities were studied in two agroforestry systems. • We studied hedgerow and shelterbelt systems and their component land-uses (cropland vs forest). • The biological stability of SOC was higher in hedgerow than in shelterbelt system. • The biological stability of SOC was higher in cropland than in forest land-use. • Agroforestry system by land-use interactively affected the thermal stability of SOC. Agroforestry systems play important roles in carbon (C) sequestration in western Canada. However, the effect of agroforestry system type and their component land-uses (forested area and cropland) on soil organic C (SOC) stability is poorly understood. We studied SOC stability in surface soils from two agroforestry systems (shelterbelt system and hedgerow system) and their component land-uses (forested area and cropland) in western Canada. A 61-day laboratory incubation was used to assess SOC biological stability, and compared to thermal stability measured during ramped combustion. The shelterbelt system had a lower biological stability than the hedgerow system as indicated by the higher cumulative soil respiration and SOC loss during incubation. Cumulative respiration and SOC loss during incubation in the forested area was 1.63 and 1.57 times that in the cropland, indicating a lower SOC biological stability in the former. Thermal stability indicators, CO 2 -T 50 (the temperature at which half of the CO 2 is produced), DSC-T 50 (the temperature at which half of the exothermic energy of the SOC is released) and ROI (return on energy investment) were influenced by the interactive effects of the agroforestry system by land-use, while TG-T 50 (the temperature at which half of the exothermic mass is lost) and Ed (energy density) were influenced by land-use and the interactive effects of agroforestry system by land-use. Hedgerow cropland had a higher SOC thermal stability (higher TG-T 50) than the hedgerow forested area, while there was no difference among shelterbelt cropland, and the forested areas of shelterbelt and hedgerow system. We conclude that planting trees on agricultural land to form agroforestry systems alters SOC biological and thermal stabilities, and the hedgerow system may have a more stable SOC than the shelterbelt system, thus, maintaining the hedgerow system may enhance C stability, promote C sequestration and climate change mitigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Tree areas of agroforestry systems (AFS) stored more C than adjacent herblands. • Surface organic horizon contained 10% of the C stored in the tree area of AFS. • C storage in surface organic horizon was positively related to tree age. • Establishing AFS can be an effective strategy for climate change mitigation. Agroforestry systems (AFS) are increasingly being recognized as sustainable land-use systems that can increase carbon (C) sequestration and improve food security. However, the relative contributions of various C pools to the overall C stock of AFS and their dependence on factors such as tree age, species diversity and density is still unclear in many regions. Using an equivalent soil mass approach, we investigated the effect of three different AFS (hedgerow, shelterbelt, and silvopasture) and their component land-use types (treed areas and adjacent cropland/grassland) on various C pools across 36 sites in central Alberta, Canada. On average, the treed area within AFS stored 178.5 t ha−1 more C relative to adjacent cropland or grassland, although the total C stock did not differ among the three AFS types. Most of the C in the treed area of AFS was stored in the mineral soil (61%), overstory trees (28%), and the LFH (litter, partially decomposed litter and humus, 10%) layer, while midstory trees, shrubs, and understory vegetation together accounted for the remaining 1% of the C storage. The C stock size in the treed area was closely associated with tree stand characteristics of the three AFS, with the C pool size in the LFH positively related to tree age. Our results highlight that the amount of C stored in the LFH layer is substantial and should be considered when assessing C storage within AFS and suggest that investing in AFS can be an effective strategy for meeting part of Canada's C reduction goals to mitigate climate change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]