Advertisement

Biogeochemistry

, Volume 142, Issue 1, pp 37–51 | Cite as

The response of soil respiration to climatic drivers in undrained forest and drained oil palm plantations in an Indonesian peatland

  • E. Swails
  • D. Hertanti
  • K. Hergoualc’h
  • L. Verchot
  • D. Lawrence
Article

Abstract

To accurately quantify tropical peatlands’ contribution to global greenhouse gas emissions, and to understand how emissions from peat may change in the future, long-term measurements over seasons and years are needed. Sampling soil respiration over a range of temperature and moisture conditions in the field is valuable for understanding how peat soil emissions may respond to climate change. We collected monthly measurements of total soil respiration, moisture and temperature from forest and smallholder oil palm plantations on peat in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. Our study period, from January 2014 through September 2015, covered wet–dry transitions during 1 year with relatively normal precipitation and one El Niño year. Oil palm plots, with lower water table, had 22% higher total soil respiration (0.71 ± 0.04 g CO2 m−2 h−1) than forest plots (0.58 ± 0.04 g CO2 m−2 h−1) over the entire monitoring period. However, during the El Niño event in September 2015, despite overall lower water table levels in oil palm plots, total soil respiration was higher in forest (1.24 ± 0.20 g CO2 m−2 h−1) than in oil palm (0.90 ± 0.09 g CO2 m−2 h−1). Land-use change continues to be an important driver of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from Indonesian peatlands. However, the stronger response of total soil respiration to extreme drought in forest indicates the potential importance of climate regime in determining future net carbon (C) emissions from these ecosystems. Future warming and increased intensity of seasonal drying may increase C emissions from Indonesian peatlands, regardless of land-use.

Keywords

Indonesia Peat Land-use Oil palm Soil respiration Climate change 

Supplementary material

10533_2018_519_MOESM1_ESM.docx (406 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 406 kb)

References

  1. Aini FK, Hergoualc'h K, Smith JU, Verchot L (2015) Nitrous oxide emissions along a gradient of tropical forest disturbance on mineral soils in Sumatra. Agric Ecosyst Environ 214:107–117Google Scholar
  2. Austin KG, Kasibhatla PS, Urban DL (2015) Reconciling oil palm expansion and climate change mitigation in Kalimantan, Indonesia. PLoS ONE 10:5Google Scholar
  3. Bray HR, Kurtz LT (1945) Determination of total, organic, and available forms of phosphorus in soils. Soil Sci 59:39–45Google Scholar
  4. Cai W, Bolace S, Lengaigne M, van Rensch P, Collins M, Vecchi G, Timmermann A, Santoso A, McPhaden MJ, Wu L, England MW, Wange G, Guilyardi E, Jin FF (2014) Increasing frequency of extreme El Niño events due to greenhouse warming. Nat Clim Change 4:111–116Google Scholar
  5. Chadwick R, Boutle I, Martin G (2013) Spatial patterns of precipitation change in CMIP5: why the rich do not get richer in the tropics. J Clim 26:3803–3822Google Scholar
  6. Comeau LP, Hergoualc’h K, Smith S, Verchot L (2013) Conversion of intact peat swamp forest to palm plantation: effects on soil CO2 fluxes in Jambi, Sumatra. CIFOR Working Paper 110Google Scholar
  7. Comeau LP, Hergoualc’h K, Hartill J, Smith J, Verchot LV, Peak D, Salim AM (2016) How do the heterotrophic and the total soil respiration of an oil palm plantation on peat respond to nitrogen fertilizer application? Geoderma 268:41–51Google Scholar
  8. Dahnke WC (1990) Testing soils for available nitrogen. In: Westerman RL (ed) Soil testing and plant analysis. Soil Science Society of America Book Series 3. ASA, Madison, pp 120–140Google Scholar
  9. Dariah A, Marwanto S, Agus F (2014) Root- and peat-based CO2 emissions from oil palm plantations. Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Change 19:831–843Google Scholar
  10. Darmosarkoro W, Sutarta dan Winarna ES (2003) Teknologi pemupukan tanaman kelapa sawit Dalam Lahan dan Pemupukan Kelapa Sawit (Medan: Pusat Penelitian Kelapa Sawit), pp 113–34Google Scholar
  11. Farmer J, Matthew R, Smith P, Langan C, Hergoualc’h K, Verchot L, Smith J (2014) Comparison of methods for quantifying soil carbon in tropical peats. Geoderma 214-215:177–183Google Scholar
  12. Field RD, van der Werf GR, Fanin T, Fetzer EJ, Fuller R, Jethva H, Levy R, Livesey NJ, Luo M, Torres O, Worden HM (2016) Indonesian fire activity and smoke pollution in 2015 show persistent nonlinear sensitivity to El Niño-induced drought. Proc Natl Acad Sci 113:9204–9209Google Scholar
  13. Gaveau D, Sheil D, Husnayaen M, Sanjiwana A, Ancrenaz M, Pacheco P, Meijaard E (2016) Rapid conversions and avoided deforestation: examining four decades of industrial plantation expansion in Borneo. Sci Rep 6:32017Google Scholar
  14. Goodrick I, Nelson P, Nake S, Webb M, Bird M, Huth N (2016) Tree-scale variability of soil carbon cycling in a mature oil palm plantation. Soil Res 54:397–406Google Scholar
  15. Gumbricht T, Roman-Cuesta RM, Verchot L, Herold M, Wittmann F, Householder E, Herold N, Murdiyarso D (2017) An expert system model for mapping tropical wetlands and peatlands reveals South America as the largest contributor. Glob Change Biol.  https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13689 Google Scholar
  16. Hanson PJ, Edwards NT, Garten CT, Andrews JA (2000) Separating root and soil microbial contributions to soil respiration: a review of methods and observations. Biogeochemistry 48:115–146Google Scholar
  17. Harrison M, Cheyne S, Sulistiyanto Y, Rieley JO (2007) Biological effects of smoke from dry-season fires in non-burnt areas of Sabangau peat swamp forest, Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. In: Proceedings of the international symposium and workshop on tropical peatland, Yogyakarta, pp 27–29Google Scholar
  18. Hergoualc'h K, Verchot LV (2011) Stocks and fluxes of carbon associated with land use change in Southeast Asian tropical peatlands: a review. Global Biogeochem Cycles. 1:1–10.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2009gb003718 Google Scholar
  19. Hergoualc’h K, Verchot LV (2014) Greenhouse gas emission factors for land use and land-use change in Southeast Asian peatlands. Mitig Adapt Strateg Global Change 19:789–807Google Scholar
  20. Hergoualc’h K, Hendry DT, Murdiyarso D, Verchot LV (2017) Total and heterotrophic soil respiration in a swamp forest and oil palm plantations on peat in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. Biogeochemistry 135:203–220Google Scholar
  21. Hirano T, Segah H, Harada T, Limin S, June T, Hirata R, Osaki M (2007) Carbon dioxide balance of a tropical peat swamp forest in Kalimantan, Indonesia. Glob Change Biol 13:412–425Google Scholar
  22. Hirano T, Jauhiainen J, Inoue T, Takahashi H (2009) Controls on the carbon balance of tropical peatlands. Ecosystems 12:873–887Google Scholar
  23. Hirano T, Segah H, Kusin K, Limin S, Takahashi H, Osaki M (2012) Effects of disturbances on the carbon balance of tropical peat swamp forests. Glob Change Biol 18:3410–3422Google Scholar
  24. Hodgkins S, Richardson C, Dommain R et al (2018) Tropical peatland carbon storage linked to global latitudinal trends in peat recalcitrance. Nat Commun 1:1–10.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-06050-2 Google Scholar
  25. Jauhiainen J, Takahashi H, Heikkinen J, Martikainen P, Vasander H (2005) Carbon fluxes from a tropical peat swamp forest floor. Glob Change Biol 11:1788–1797Google Scholar
  26. Jauhiainen J, Hooijer A, Page SE (2012) Carbon dioxide emissions from Acacia plantations on peatland in Sumatra, Indonesia. Biogeosciences 9:617–630Google Scholar
  27. Jauhiainen J, Silvennoinen H, Kononen M, Limin S, Vasandar H (2016) Management driven changes in carbon mineralization dynamics of tropical peatlands. Biogeochemistry 129:115–132Google Scholar
  28. Khalid H, Zin ZZ, Anderson JM (1999) Quantification of oil palm biomass and nutrient value in a mature oil palm plantation: belowground biomass. J Oil Palm Res 11:63–71Google Scholar
  29. Koh LP, Miettinen J, Liew SC, Ghazoul J (2011) Remotely sensed evidence of tropical peatland conversion to oil palm. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108:5127–5132Google Scholar
  30. Kripalani R, Kulkarni A (1997) Rainfall variability over South-East Asia: connections with Indian monsoon and ENSO extremes: new perspectives. Int J Climatol 17:1155–1168Google Scholar
  31. La Quéré C, Andrew R, Friedlingstein P et al (2018) Global carbon budget 2017. Earth Syst Sci Data.  https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-10-405-2018 Google Scholar
  32. Lim KH, Lim SS, Parish F, Suarto R (2012) RSPO Manual on best management practices for existing oil palm cultivation on peat. Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil, Kuala LumpurGoogle Scholar
  33. Marwanto S, Agus F (2014) Is CO2 flux from oil palm plantations on peatland controlled by soil moisture and/or soil and air temperatures? Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Change 19:809–819Google Scholar
  34. McLean EO (1982) Soil pH and lime requirement. In: Page AL et al (eds) Methods of soil analysis, part 2. Agronomy Monogr. 9, 2nd edn. ASA and SSSA, Madison, pp 199–223Google Scholar
  35. Mehlich A (1984) Mehlich-3 soil test extractant: a modification of Mehlich-2 extractant. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal 15:1409–1416Google Scholar
  36. Melling L, Hatano R, Goh KJ (2005) Soil CO2 flux from three ecosystems in tropical peatland of Sarawak, Malaysia, Tellus B. Chem Phys Meteorol 57(1):1–11.  https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusb.v57i1.16772 Google Scholar
  37. Miettinen J, Hooijer A, Shi C, Tollenaar D, Vernimmen R, Liew SC, Malins C, Page SE (2012) Extent of industrial plantations on Southeast Asian peatlands in 2010 with analysis of historical expansion and future projections. Glob Change Biol Bioenergy 4:908–918Google Scholar
  38. Miettinen J, Shi C, Liew SC (2016) Land cover distribution in the peatlands of Peninsular Malaysia, Sumatra and Borneo in 2015 with changes since 1990. Global Ecol Conserv 6:67–78Google Scholar
  39. Miettinen J, Hooijer A, Vernimmen R, Liew SC, Page SE (2017) From carbon sink to carbon source: extensive peat oxidation in insular Southeast Asia since 1990. Environ Res Lett 12:024014Google Scholar
  40. National Climatic Data Center (2015) Global historical climate network. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency, United States of America. https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cdo-web/datasets
  41. Nelson DW, Sommers LE (1996) Total carbon, organic carbon and organic matter. In: Bartels JM et al. (ed) Methods of soil analysis: part 3 chemical methods (3rd ed.) ASA and SSSA Book Series 5, Madison, pp 961–1010Google Scholar
  42. Nelson PN, Banabas M, Scotter DR, Webb MJ (2006) Using soil water depletion to measure spatial distribution of root activity in oil palm (Elaeis guineensis Jacq.) plantations. Plant Soil 286:109–121Google Scholar
  43. Novita N (2016) Carbon stocks and soil greenhouse gas emissions associated with forest conversion to oil palm plantations in Tanjung Puting tropical peatlands, Indonesia. PhD dissertation. Oregon State UniversityGoogle Scholar
  44. Obidzinski K, Andriani R, Komarudin H, Andrianto A (2012) Environmental and social impacts of oil palm plantations and their implications for biofuel production in Indonesia. Ecol Soc 17:25Google Scholar
  45. Power S, Delage F, Chung C, Kociuba G, Keay K (2013a) Robust twenty-first-century projections of El Niño and related precipitation variability. Nature 502:541–545Google Scholar
  46. Power S, Delage F, Chung C, Kociuba G, Keay K (2013b) Robust twenty-first-century projections of El Nino and related precipitation variability. Nature 502:541–545Google Scholar
  47. Prentice IC et al (2001) The carbon cycle and atmospheric carbon dioxide. In: Climate change 2001: the scientific basis. In: Contribution of working group I to the third assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change [Houghton, JT, et al (ed)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 183–237Google Scholar
  48. Pumpanen J, Longdoz B, Kutsch WL (2009) Field measurements of soil respiration: principles and constraints, potentials and limitations of different methods. In: Heinemeyer A et al (eds) Soil carbon dynamics-an integrated methodology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 16–33Google Scholar
  49. Swails E, Jaye D, Verchot L, Hergoualc’h K, Schirrmann M, Borchard N, Wahyuni N, Lawrence D (2018) Will CO2 emissions from drained tropical peatlands decline over time? Links between soil organic matter quality, nutrients, and C mineralization rates. Ecosystems 21:868–885Google Scholar
  50. Tibshirani R (1996) Regression shrinkage and selection via the Lasso. J R Stat Soc 58:267–288Google Scholar
  51. Warren MW, Kauffman JB, Murdiyarso D, Anshari G, Hergoalc’h K, Kurnianto S, Purbopuspito J, Gusmayanti E, Afifudin M, Rahajoe J, Alhamd L, Limin S, Iswandi A (2012) A cost-efficient method to assess carbon stocks in tropical peat soil. Biogeosciences 9:4477–4485Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Environmental SciencesUniversity of VirginiaCharlottesvilleUSA
  2. 2.Center for International Forestry ResearchBogorIndonesia
  3. 3.International Center for Tropical AgricultureCaliColombia

Personalised recommendations