Meta-analysis shows the impacts of ecological restoration on greenhouse gas emissions

被引:5
|
作者
He, Tiehu [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
Ding, Weixin [5 ]
Cheng, Xiaoli [6 ]
Cai, Yanjiang [7 ]
Zhang, Yulong [8 ]
Xia, Huijuan [1 ,2 ]
Wang, Xia [1 ,2 ]
Zhang, Jiehao [1 ,2 ]
Zhang, Kerong [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
Zhang, Quanfa [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Chinese Acad Sci, Key Lab Aquat Bot & Watershed Ecol, Wuhan Bot Garden, Wuhan 430074, Peoples R China
[2] Chinese Acad Sci & Hubei Prov, Res Stn, Danjiangkou Wetland Ecosyst Field Sci Observat, Wuhan 430074, Peoples R China
[3] Chinese Acad Sci, Nanjing Inst Geog & Limnol, Key Lab Lake & Watershed Sci Water Secur, Nanjing 210008, Peoples R China
[4] Chinese Acad Sci, Hubei Key Lab Wetland Evolut & Ecol Restorat, Wuhan Bot Garden, Wuhan 430074, Peoples R China
[5] Chinese Acad Sci, Inst Soil Sci, State Key Lab Soil & Sustainable Agr, Nanjing 210008, Peoples R China
[6] Yunnan Univ, Sch Ecol & Environm Sci, Kunming 650091, Peoples R China
[7] Zhejiang A&F Univ, State Key Lab Subtrop Silviculture, Hangzhou 311300, Peoples R China
[8] US Forest Serv, Eastern Forest Environm Threat Assessment Ctr, Southern Res Stn, USDA, Res Triangle Pk, NC 27709 USA
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
D O I
10.1038/s41467-024-46991-5
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
International initiatives set ambitious targets for ecological restoration, which is considered a promising greenhouse gas mitigation strategy. Here, we conduct a meta-analysis to quantify the impacts of ecological restoration on greenhouse gas emissions using a dataset compiled from 253 articles. Our findings reveal that forest and grassland restoration increase CH4 uptake by 90.0% and 30.8%, respectively, mainly due to changes in soil properties. Conversely, wetland restoration increases CH4 emissions by 544.4%, primarily attributable to elevated water table depth. Forest and grassland restoration have no significant effect on N2O emissions, while wetland restoration reduces N2O emissions by 68.6%. Wetland restoration enhances net CO2 uptake, and the transition from net CO2 sources to net sinks takes approximately 4 years following restoration. The net ecosystem CO2 exchange of the restored forests decreases with restoration age, and the transition from net CO2 sources to net sinks takes about 3-5 years for afforestation and reforestation sites, and 6-13 years for clear-cutting and post-fire sites. Overall, forest, grassland and wetland restoration decrease the global warming potentials by 327.7%, 157.7% and 62.0% compared with their paired control ecosystems, respectively. Our findings suggest that afforestation, reforestation, rewetting drained wetlands, and restoring degraded grasslands through grazing exclusion, reducing grazing intensity, or converting croplands to grasslands can effectively mitigate greenhouse gas emissions. International initiatives set ambitious targets for ecological restoration. Here, the authors conduct a meta-analysis to quantify the impacts of ecological restoration on greenhouse gas emissions and find that forest, grassland, and wetland restoration reduce global warming potential.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Enhancement of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services by Ecological Restoration: A Meta-Analysis
    Rey Benayas, Jose M.
    Newton, Adrian C.
    Diaz, Anita
    Bullock, James M.
    [J]. SCIENCE, 2009, 325 (5944) : 1121 - 1124
  • [42] Meta-Analysis of Strategies to Reduce NH3 Emissions from Slurries in European Agriculture and Consequences for Greenhouse Gas Emissions
    Emmerling, Christoph
    Krein, Andreas
    Junk, Juergen
    [J]. AGRONOMY-BASEL, 2020, 10 (11):
  • [43] Modeling California policy impacts on greenhouse gas emissions
    Greenblatt, Jeffery B.
    [J]. ENERGY POLICY, 2015, 78 : 158 - 172
  • [44] Impacts of nationally determined contributions on 2030 global greenhouse gas emissions: uncertainty analysis and distribution of emissions
    Benveniste, Helene
    Boucher, Olivier
    Guivarch, Celine
    Le Treut, Herve
    Criqui, Patrick
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2018, 13 (01):
  • [45] Emissions in the stream: estimating the greenhouse gas impacts of an oil and gas boom
    Waxman, Andrew R.
    Khomaini, Achmad
    Leibowicz, Benjamin D.
    Olmstead, Sheila M.
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2020, 15 (01):
  • [46] Non-negligible greenhouse gas emissions from non-sewered sanitation systems: A meta-analysis
    Cheng, Shikun
    Long, Jinyun
    Evans, Barbara
    Zhan, Zhe
    Li, Tianxin
    Chen, Cong
    Mang, Heinz-Peter
    Li, Zifu
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH, 2022, 212
  • [47] How costly is mitigation of non-CO2 greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture? A meta-analysis
    Vermont, Bruno
    De Cara, Stephane
    [J]. ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2010, 69 (07) : 1373 - 1386
  • [48] A meta-analysis of the genetic contribution to greenhouse gas emission in sheep
    Hossein-Zadeh, Navid Ghavi
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ANIMAL BREEDING AND GENETICS, 2023, 140 (01) : 49 - 59
  • [49] Analysis of greenhouse gas emissions in the Netherlands
    Evers, CWA
    [J]. AIR POLLUTION IV: MONITORING, SIMULATION AND CONTROL, 1996, : 415 - 423
  • [50] Analysis of greenhouse gas emissions in The Netherlands
    Evers, CWA
    [J]. DEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATION OF COMPUTER TECHNIQUES TO ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES, 1998, 2 : 117 - 126