Assessment of biomass and net primary productivity of a dry tropical forest using geospatial technology

Tarun Kumar Thakur , S. L. Swamy , Arvind Bijalwan , Mammohan J. R. Dobriyal

Journal of Forestry Research ›› 2019, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (1) : 157 -170.

PDF
Journal of Forestry Research ›› 2019, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (1) : 157 -170. DOI: 10.1007/s11676-018-0607-8
Original Paper

Assessment of biomass and net primary productivity of a dry tropical forest using geospatial technology

Author information +
History +
PDF

Abstract

This study quantifies biomass, aboveground and belowground net productivity, along with additional environmental factors over a 2–3 year period in Barnawapara Sanctuary of Chhattisgarh, India through satellite remote-sensing and GIS techniques. Ten sampling quadrates 20 × 20, 5 × 5 and 1 × 1 m were randomly laid for overstorey (OS), understorey (US) and ground vegetation (GS), respectively. Girth of trees was measured at breast height and collar diameters of shrubs and herbs at 0.1 m height. Biomass was estimated using allometric regression equations and herb biomass by harvesting. Net primary productivity (NPP) was determined by summing biomass increment and litter crop values. Aspect and slope influenced the vegetation types, biomass and NPP in different forests. Standing biomass and NPP varied from 18.6 to 101.5 Mg ha−1 and 5.3 to 12.7 Mg ha−1 a−1, respectively, in different forest types. The highest biomass was found in dense mixed forest, while net production recoded in Teak forests. Both were lowest in degraded mixed forests of different forest types. OS, US and GS contributed 90.4, 8.7 and 0.7%, respectively, for the total mean standing biomass in different forests. This study developed spectral models for the estimation of biomass and NPP using Normalized Difference Vegetation Index and other vegetation indices. The study demonstrated the potential of geospatial tools for estimation of biomass and net productivity of dry tropical forest ecosystem.

Keywords

Allometric regression equations / Fine root biomass / Litter fall / LAI / NDVI / Spectral models

Cite this article

Download citation ▾
Tarun Kumar Thakur, S. L. Swamy, Arvind Bijalwan, Mammohan J. R. Dobriyal. Assessment of biomass and net primary productivity of a dry tropical forest using geospatial technology. Journal of Forestry Research, 2019, 30(1): 157-170 DOI:10.1007/s11676-018-0607-8

登录浏览全文

4963

注册一个新账户 忘记密码

References

[1]

Anup KC, Manandhar R, Paudel R, Ghimire S. Increase of forest carbon biomass due to community forestry management in Nepal. J For Res, 2017

[2]

Bawa K, Rose J, Ganeshaiah KN, Barve N, Kiran MC, Umashaanker R. Assessing biodiversity from space: an example from the Western Ghats, India. Conserv Ecol, 2002 6 2 7

[3]

Beer C, Reichstein M, Tomelleri E, Ciais P, Jung M, Carvalhais N, Rodenbeck C, Altaf Arain M, Baldocchi D, Bonan GB, Bondeau A, Cescatti A, Lasslop G, Lindroth A, Lomas M, Luyssaert S, Margolis H, Oleson KW, Roupsard O, Veenendaal E, Viovy N, Williams C, Woodward FI, Papale D. Terrestrial gross carbon dioxide uptake: global distribution and covariation with climate. Science, 2010, 329: 834-838.

[4]

Bijalwan A, Swamy SL, Sharma CM, Sharma NK, Tiwari AK. Land use, biomass and carbon estimation of Chhattisgarh region in India using satellite remote sensing and GIS techniques. J For Res, 2010, 21(2): 161-170.

[5]

Brown S, Lugo AE. The storage and production of organic matter in tropical forests and their role in global carbon cycle. Biotropica, 1982, 14: 161-187.

[6]

Brown S, Gillespie AJR, Lugo AE. Biomass estimation methods for tropical forests with application to forest inventory data. For Sci, 1989, 35: 881-902.

[7]

Champion HG, Seth SK (1968) A Revised Survey of Forest Types of India, Govt. of India Press, New Delhi, p 404

[8]

Chaturvedi OP, Singh JS. The structure and function of pine forest in central Himalayas. I. Dry matter dynamics. Ann Bot, 1987, 60: 237-252.

[9]

Chave J, Olivier J, Bongers F, Châtelet P, Forget PM, van der Meer P, Norden N, Riera B, Charles-Dominique P. Above-ground biomass and productivity in a rain forest of eastern South America. J Trop Ecol, 2008, 24: 355-366.

[10]

Clark DA, Brown S, Kicklighter DW, Chambers JQ, Thomlinson JR, Ni J. Measuring net primary production in forests: concepts and field methods. Ecol Appl, 2001, 11(2): 356-370.

[11]

Clark DA, Brown S, Kicklighter DW, Chambers JQ, Thomlinson JR, Ni J, Holland EA. Net primary production in tropical forests: an evaluation and synthesis of existing field data. Ecol Appl, 2001, 11(2): 371-384.

[12]

Coombs J, Hall DO, Long SP, Scourlock JMO. Techniques in bioproductivity and photosynthesis, 1987 2 Oxford: Pergamon Press.

[13]

Crews TE, Kitayama K, Fownes JH, Riley RH, Herbert DA, Mueller-Dombois D, Vitousek PM. Changes in soil phosphorus fractions and ecosystem dynamics across a long chronosequence in Hawaii. Ecology, 1995, 76: 1407-1424.

[14]

Das DK, Chaturvedi OP (2003) Litter quality effects and decomposition rates of forestry plantations. Trop Ecol 44:259–262

[15]

Davis JP, Haines B, Coleman D, Hendrick R. Fine root dynamics along an elevational gradient in the southern Appalachian Mountains, USA. For Ecol Manage, 2004, 187: 19-34.

[16]

Djomo AN, Knohl A, Gravenhorst G. Estimations of total ecosystem carbon pools distribution and carbon biomass current annual increment of a moist tropical forest. For Ecol Manage, 2011, 261: 1448-1459.

[17]

Doughty CE, Metcalfe DB, da Costa MC, de Oliveira AAR, Neto GFC, Silva JA, Aragão LEOC, Almeida SS, Quesada CA, Girardin CAJ, Halladay K, da Costa AC, Malhi Y. The production, allocation and cycling of carbon in a forest on fertile terra preta soil in eastern Amazonia compared with a forest on adjacent infertile soil. Plant Ecol Diversity, 2013, 7: 41-53.

[18]

Dutt CBS, Jha CS, Rao DBB (1994) Carrying capacity of grasslands of Srisailam tiger reserve—Nagarjunasagar, Andhra Pradesh. Technical report submitted in NRSA

[19]

Fogel R. Root turnover and productivity of coniferous forests. Plant Soil, 1983, 71: 71-85.

[20]

Gautam TP, Mandal TN. Soil characteristics in moist tropical forest of Sunsari district, Nepal. Nepal J Sci Techol, 2013, 14: 35-40.

[21]

Gautam TP, Mandal TN. Effect of disturbance on biomass, production and carbon dynamics in moist tropical forest of eastern Nepal. For Ecosyst, 2016, 3: 11.

[22]

Girardin CAJ, Espejob JES, Doughty CE, Huasco WH, Metcalfe DB, Durand-Baca L, Marthews TR, Aragao LEOC, Farfán-Rios W, García-Cabrera K, Halladay K, Fisher JB, Galiano-Cabrera DF, Huaraca-Quispe LP, Alzamora-Taype I, Eguiluz-Mora L, Salinas-Revilla N, Silman MR, Meir P, Malhi Y. Productivity and carbon allocation in a tropical montane cloud forest in the Peruvian Andes. Plant Ecol Divers, 2014, 7: 107-123.

[23]

Gomez KA, Gomez AA. Statistical procedures for agricultural research, 1984 2 New York: Wiley.

[24]

Goward SN, Kerber A, Dye DG, Kalb V. Comparison of North and South American biomes from AVHRR observations. Geocarto Int, 1987, 2(1): 27-40.

[25]

Haripriya GS. Estimates of biomass in Indian forests. Biomass Bioenergy, 2000, 19(250): 245-258.

[26]

Houghton RA, Unruh JD, Lefebure PA. Current land cover in the tropics and its potential for sequestering carbon. Glob Biogeochem Cycles, 1993, 7(2): 305-320.

[27]

Jaramillo VJ, Kaufmann JB, Rentaría-Rodríguez L, Cummings DL, Ellingson LJ. Biomass, carbon and nitrogen pools in Mexican tropical forest landscapes. Ecosystems, 2003, 6: 609-629.

[28]

Kho LK, Malhi Y, Tan SKS. Annual budget and seasonal variation of aboveground and belowground net primary productivity in a lowland dipterocarp forest in Borneo. J Geophys Res Biogeosci, 2013, 118: 1282-1296.

[29]

King AW, Wilfred M, Post M, Wullschleger SD. The potential response of terrestrial carbon storage to changes in climate and atomospheric CO2. Clim Change, 1997, 35: 199-227.

[30]

Majdi H, Anderson P. Fine root production and turnover in a Norway spruce stands in northern Sweden: effects or nitrogen and water manipulation. Ecosystems, 2005, 8(2): 191-199.

[31]

Malhi Y, Doughty C, Galbraith D. The allocation of ecosystem net primary productivity in tropical forests. Philos Trans R Soc B, 2011, 366(1582): 3225-3245.

[32]

Malhi Y, Farfán Amézquita F, Doughty CE, Silva-Espejo JE, Girardin CAJ, Metcalfe DB, Aragão LEOC, Huaraca-Quispe LP, Alzamora-Taype I, Eguiluz-Mora L, Marthews TR, Halladay K, Quesada CA, Robertson AL, Fisher JB, Zaragoza- Castells J, Rojas-Villagra CM, Pelaez-Tapia Y, Salinas N, Meir P, Phillips OL. The productivity, metabolism and carbon cycle of two lowland tropical forest plots in south-western Amazonia, Peru. Plant Ecol Divers, 2014, 7: 85-105.

[33]

Murphy PG, Lugo AE. Structure and biomass of a subtropical dry forest in Puerto Rico. Biotropica, 1986, 18: 89-96.

[34]

Murphy PG, Lugo AE. Ecology of tropical dry forest. Annu Rev Ecol Syst, 1986, 17: 67-88.

[35]

Olson JS, Watts JA, Allison LJ (1993) Carbon in live vegetation of major world ecosystems. Oak Ridge National Laboratory Environment Science. Publications 1997, ORNI-5862

[36]

Pan YD, Birdsey RA, Fang JY, Houghton R, Kauppi PE, Kurz WA, Phillips OL, Shvidenko A, Lewis SL, Canadell JG, Ciais P, Jackson RB, Pacala SW, McGuire AD, Piao SL, Rautiainen A, Sitch S, Hayes D. A large and persistent carbon sink in the world’s forests. Science, 2011, 333: 988-993.

[37]

Post WM, Emmanuel WR, Zinke PJ, Stangenberger AG. Soil carbon pools and world life zones. Nature, 1982, 298: 156-159.

[38]

Prasad R, Mishra GP. Standing biomass of various plant parts in selected tree species of dry deciduous teak forest of M.P. Indian For, 1985, 110(8): 765-782.

[39]

Prince SD, Goward SM. Global primary production: a remote sensing approach. J Biogeogr, 1995, 22: 815-835.

[40]

Rai SN, Proctor J. Ecological studies on four rainforests in Karnataka, India. II. Litterfall. J Ecol, 1986, 74: 455-463.

[41]

Raich JW, Russell AE, Vitousek PM. Primary productivity and ecosystem development along an elevational gradient on Mauna Loa, Hawai’i. Ecology, 1997, 78: 707-721.

[42]

Rawat YS, Singh JS. Structure and function of oak forests in Central Himalaya. II. Nutrient dynamics. Ann Bot, 1988, 62(4): 413-427.

[43]

Roy PS, Ravan SA. Biomass estimation using satellite remote sensing data—an investigation on possible approaches for natural forest. J Biosci, 1996, 21(4): 535-561.

[44]

Shepherd D, Montagnini F. Above ground carbon sequestration potential in mixed and pure tree plantations in the humid tropics. J Trop For Sci, 2001, 13(3): 450-459.

[45]

Shirima DD, Pfeifer M, Platts PJ, Totland Ø, Moe SR. Interactions between canopy structure and herbaceous biomass along environmental gradients in moist forest and dry miombo woodland of Tanzania. PLoS ONE, 2015 10 11 e0142784

[46]

Singh KP, Mishra R (1979) Structure and functioning of natural modified and silvicultural ecosystems of eastern Uttar Pradesh. Final technical report (1975–1978). MAB Research Project-Banaras Hindu University India

[47]

Singh JS, Singh SP. Forest vegetation of the Himalaya. Bot Rev, 1987, 53: 82-192.

[48]

Singh VP, Singh JS (1989) Man and forests: a case study from the dry tropics of India. Environ Conserv 16:129–136

[49]

Singh L, Singh JS. Species structure, dry matter dynamics and carbon flux of a dry tropical forest in India. Ann Bot, 1991, 68: 263-273.

[50]

Spanner MA, Pierce IL, Peterson DL, Running SW. Remote sensing of temperate coniferous forest leaf area index: the influence of canopy closer understorey vegetation back ground reflectance. Int J Remote Sens, 1990, 11: 195-211.

[51]

Sundarapandian SM, Swamy PS. Fine root biomass distribution and productivity patterns under open and closed canopies of tropical forest ecosystems at Kodayar in Western Ghats. South India For Ecol Manage, 1996, 86(1): 181-192.

[52]

Swamy SL (1998) Estimation of Net Primary Productivity (NPP) in an Indian tropical evergreen forest using remote sensing data. Ph.D. thesis, Jawaharlal Nehru Technology University, Hyderabad, India

[53]

Thenkabail PS, Gamage MSDN, Smakhtin VU (2004) The use of remote sensing data for drought assessment and monitoring in Southwest Asia. Research report 85. International Water Management Institute, Colombo

[54]

Tiwari AK. Mapping forest biomass through digital processing of IRS-1A data. Int J Remote Sens, 1994, 15(9): 1849-1866.

[55]

Tucker CJ, Choundhury BH. Satellite remote sensing of drought conditions. Remote Sens Environ, 1987, 23: 243-251.

[56]

Unni NUM, Murthy MSR, Swamy SL, Dutt CBS (1992) Fuelwood sustainability in rural areas—a model study using satellite remote sensing data. Technical report submitted in NRSA Hyderabad, India

[57]

Vitousek PM, Sanford RL. Nutrient cycling in moist tropical forest. Annu Rev Ecol Syst, 1986, 17: 137-167.

[58]

Vogt KA, Grier CC, Vogt DJ. Production, turnover, and nutrient dynamics of above- and belowground detritus of world forest. Adv Ecol Res, 1986, 15: 303-377.

[59]

Vogt KA, Vogt DS, Palmiotto PA, Boon P, Hara JO, Asbjornsen H. Review of root dynamics in forest ecosystem grouped by climate, climatic forest type and species. Plant Soil, 1996, 187: 159-219.

[60]

Wang XC, Wang SD, Dai LM. Estimating and mapping forest biomass in northeast China using joint forest resources inventory and remote sensing data. J For Res, 2017

[61]

Zheng DL, Rademacher J, Chen JQ, Crow T, Bresee M, Moine JL, Ryu SR. Estimating aboveground biomass using landsat 7 ETM+ data across a managed landscape in northern Wisconsin, USA. Remote Sens Environ, 2004, 93(3): 402-411.

AI Summary AI Mindmap
PDF

133

Accesses

0

Citation

Detail

Sections
Recommended

AI思维导图

/