Search

The use of land for intensive arable production in Europe is associated with a range of externalities that typically impose costs on third parties. The introduction of trees in arable systems can potentially be used to reduce these costs. This paper assesses the profitability and environmental externalities of a silvoarable agroforestry system, and compares this with the profitability and environmental externalities from an arable system and a forestry system. A silvoarable experimental plot of poplar trees planted in 1992 in Bedfordshire, Eastern England, was used as a case study. The Yield-SAFE model was used to simulate the growth and yields of the silvoarable, arable, and forestry land uses along with the associated environmental externalities, including carbon sequestration, greenhouse gas emissions, nitrogen and phosphorus surplus, and soil erosion losses by water. The Farm-SAFE model was then used to quantify the monetary value of these effects. The study assesses both the financial profitability from a farmer perspective and the economic benefit from a societal perspective. The arable option was the most financially profitable system followed by the silvoarable system and forestry. However, when the environmental externalities were included, silvoarable agroforestry provided the greatest benefit. This suggests that the appropriate integration of trees in arable land can provide greater well-being benefits to society overall, than arable farming without trees, or forestry systems on their own.

Multi-functional silvopastoral systems provide a wide range of services to human society including the regulation of nutrients and water in soils and the sequestration of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2). Although silvopastoral systems significantly contribute to enhance aboveground carbon (C) sequestration (e.g. C accumulation in woody plant biomass), their long-term effects on soil C pools are less clear. In this study we performed soil physical fractionation analyses to quantify the C pool of different aggregate fractions across three land use types including (1) silvopastoral system with ash trees (Fraxinus excelsior L.), (2) planted woodland with ash trees, and (3) permanent grassland, which were established in 1989 at Loughgall, Northern Ireland, UK. Our results show that 26 years after the conversion of permanent grassland to either silvopastoral or woodland systems, soil C (and N) stocks (0–20 cm depth) did not significantly change between the three land use types. We found, however, that permanent grassland soils were associated with significantly higher C pools (g C kg−1 soil; P 2 mm) whereas soil C pools of the micro-aggregate (53–250 μm) and silt and clay (

Agroforestry combines perennial woody elements (e.g. trees) with an agricultural understory (e.g. wheat, pasture) which can also potentially be used by a livestock component. In recent decades, modern agroforestry systems have been proposed at European level as land use alternatives for conventional agricultural systems. The potential range of benefits that modern agroforestry systems can provide includes farm product diversification (food and timber), soil and biodiversity conservation and carbon sequestration, both in woody biomass and the soil. Whilst typically these include benefits such as food and timber provision, potentially, there are benefits in the form of carbon sequestration, both in woody biomass and in the soil. Quantifying the effect of agroforestry systems on soil carbon is important because it is one means by which atmospheric carbon can be sequestered in order to reduce global warming. However, experimental systems that can combine the different alternative features of agroforestry systems are difficult to implement and long-term. For this reason, models are needed to explore these alternatives, in order to determine what benefits different combinations of trees and understory might provide in agroforestry systems. This paper describes the integration of the widely used soil carbon model RothC, a model simulating soil organic carbon turnover, into Yield-SAFE, a parameter sparse model to estimate aboveground biomass in agroforestry systems. The improvement of the Yield-SAFE model focused on the estimation of input plant material into soil (i.e. leaf fall and root mortality) while maintaining the original aspiration for a simple conceptualization of agroforestry modeling, but allowing to feed inputs to a soil carbon module based on RothC. Validation simulations show that the combined model gives predictions consistent with observed data for both SOC dynamics and tree leaf fall. Two case study systems are examined: a cork oak system in South Portugal and a poplar system in the UK, in current and future climate. (c) 2017, Springer Science+Business Media B.V. European Commission through the AGFORWARD FP7 research Project (contract 613520), Forest Research Center strategic Project (PEst OE/AGR/UI0239/2014), the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) fellowships SFRH/BD/52691/2014 and SFRH/BPD/96475/2013, XUNTA DE GALICIA, Consellería de Cultura, Educación e Ordenación Universitaria (“Programa de axudas á etapa posdoutoral”) (contract ED481B 2016/071-0)

This study determined the effect of two tree planting methods (woodland and a silvopastoral agroforestry system) on the soil bulk density and organic carbon content of a grassland site in lowland England. Soil organic carbon was measured in pasture, silvopastoral tree, and woodland treatments at six depths representative of 0–150 cm. Fourteen years after tree planting, the organic carbon content in the surface soil layer (0–10 cm) was greatest in the pasture (6.0 g 100 g− 1) and least in the woodland (4.6 g 100 g− 1); the value (5.3 g 100 g− 1) below the silvopastoral trees was intermediate. In the 10–20 cm layer, the organic carbon content in the woodland was 13% lower than the pasture. No treatment effects on soil carbon were detected below 20 cm. Possible reasons for the decline in surface soil carbon include a decline in grass cover and reduced soil water content. Measurements of above ground carbon storage by the trees indicated that tree planting increased overall carbon storage, with the silvopastoral system predicted to achieve a higher level of carbon storage than equivalent areas of separate woodland and pasture. A power analysis indicates that a prohibitively large number of replicates is needed to ensure a lower than 20% risk of falsely concluding no treatment differences at individual depth increments below 10 cm and cumulative depths extending below 40 cm.

Aim To determine, for arable land in a temperate area, the effect of tree establishment and intercropping treatments, on the distribution of roots and soil organic carbon to a depth of 1.5 m. Methods A poplar (Populus sp.) silvoarable agroforestry experiment including arable controls was established on arable land in lowland England in 1992. The trees were intercropped with an arable rotation or bare fallow for the first 11 years, thereafter grass was allowed to establish. Coarse and fine root distributions (to depths of up to 1.5 m and up to 5 m from the trees) were measured in 1996, 2003, and 2011. The amount and type of soil carbon to 1.5 m depth was also measured in 2011. Results The trees, initially surrounded by arable crops rather than fallow, had a deeper coarse root distribution with less lateral expansion. In 2011, the combined length of tree and understorey vegetation roots was greater in the agroforestry treatments than the control, at depths below 0.9 m. Between 0 and 1.5 m depth, the fine root carbon in the agroforestry treatment (2.56 t ha-1) was 79% greater than that in the control (1.43 t ha-1). Although the soil organic carbon in the top 0.6 m under the trees (161 t C ha-1) was greater than in the control (142 t C ha-1), a tendency for smaller soil carbon levels beneath the trees at lower depths, meant that there was no overall tree effect when a 1.5 m soil depth was considered. From a limited sample, there was no tree effect on the proportion of recalcitrant soil organic carbon. Conclusions The observed decline in soil carbon beneath the trees at soil depths greater than 60 cm, if observed elsewhere, has important implication for assessments of the role of afforestation and agroforestry in sequestering carbon.