Next Article in Journal
Assessment of Water Resources under Climate Change in Western Hindukush Region: A Case Study of the Upper Kabul River Basin
Next Article in Special Issue
Study on Spatial-Temporal Evolution, Decoupling Effect and Influencing Factors of Tourism Transportation Carbon Emissions: Taking North China as an Example
Previous Article in Journal
A Comprehensive Review of Assessing Storm Surge Disasters: From Traditional Statistical Methods to Artificial Intelligence-Based Techniques
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Atmosphere
Volume 15
Issue 3
10.3390/atmos15030360
atmosphere-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Carbon Fluxes from Soils of “Ladoga” Carbon Monitoring Site Leningrad Region, Russia

by
Evgeny Abakumov
1,
Maria Makarova
2,
Nina Paramonova
3,
Viktor Ivakhov
3,
Timur Nizamutdinov
1 and
Vyacheslav Polyakov
1,*
1
Department of Atmospheric Physics, Institute of Earth Sciences, St. Petersburg State University, Universitetskaya Embankment 7/9, 199034 St. Petersburg, Russia
2
Department of Applied Ecology, Faculty of Biology, St. Petersburg State University, 16th Liniya V.O. 29, 199178 St. Petersburg, Russia
3
Voeikov Main Geophysical Observatory, 194021 St. Petersburg, Russia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Atmosphere 2024, 15(3), 360; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15030360
Submission received: 2 February 2024 / Revised: 9 March 2024 / Accepted: 14 March 2024 / Published: 15 March 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Urban Carbon Emissions)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
For the first time, data on the emission of climate-active gases from soils of different types of use of the south taiga sub-zone were obtained. Soils of the boreal belt are key elements of the global carbon cycle. They determine the sink and emission of climate-active gases. Soils near large cities are a major carbon sink, in the face of climate change, soils from sinks can become a source of carbon and contribute significantly to climate change on the planet. Studies of FCO2 and FCH4 fluxes were carried out on the territory of the monitoring site “Ladoga” located in the southern taiga subzone in soils of land not used in agriculture, former agriculture lands, and wetlands. During the chamber measurements, a portable gas analyzer GLA131-GGA (ABB, Canada) was used. The chamber was placed on the soil, after which the concentration of CO2, CH4 and H2O in the mobile chamber was recorded. As a result of the study it was found that the lowest emission of carbon dioxide is characteristic of soils developing on the soils of wetland and is 0.64 gCO2/(m2*year). Which is associated with a high degree of hydrophobicity of the territory and changes in the redox regime. The highest emission of carbon dioxide is registered in soils on the land not used in agriculture and is 4.16 gCO2/(m2*year). This is due to the formation of predominantly labile forms of carbon in the soil, which can be relatively rapidly involved in the carbon cycle and affect the active emission of carbon from the soil. According to the data obtained on FCH4 emission from soils, it was found that soils of land not used in agriculture and former agriculture lands were net sinks, while soils of wetlands were characterized by CH4 source, the emission was from 0.05 to 0.83 gCH4/(m2*year). The results obtained indicate spatial heterogeneity and changes in the carbon cycle within the monitoring site “Ladoga”, which are due to the change of plant communities and habitat type. Monitoring the release of important greenhouse gases in close proximity to major urban areas is an important task in the face of predicted climate change and increasing rates of urbanization.

1. Introduction

One of the causes of climate change on Earth is the increasing concentrations of thermodynamically active gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4) in the atmospheric air [1,2]. Atmospheric CO2 content is controlled by gas exchange processes between different carbon reservoirs: the atmosphere, continental ecosystem, hydrosphere and lithosphere—and by some chemical reactions for which CO2 is the end product. Such processes and reactions form the global biogeochemical carbon cycle, in which a range of carbon-containing gases, including CH4 and carbon monoxide (CO), are involved in addition to CO2 [1,3]. CH4 is the second most important greenhouse gas, with a global warming potential 28 times greater than CO2 [1]. The consequences of climate change have a significant and increasing impact on the socio-economic development of the country, living conditions and health of people, as well as on the state of economic facilities [4]. The boreal zone includes about 1/3 of the planet’s forests and carbon stocks [5]. Boreal forests are thought to be a net carbon sink, but recent assessments indicate that this statement is only partially true [6]. Depending on the type of land use, boreal soils can be carbon neutral as well as acting as a carbon source [7]. This is due to increased temperature in the boreal ecosystem [8]. On the territory of Russia, climate warming is approximately 2.5 times more intense than the average for the globe [9]. According to the Report on Climate Peculiarities on the Territory of Russia for 2022 [10], it was found that the average annual air temperature (deviation from the average for 1991–2020) was +0.87 °C. Temperatures above the climatic norm were observed almost throughout the country. At the same time, the highest rate of increase in the mean annual temperature was observed in the Arctic zone +0.8 °C/10 years. There is a stable tendency for the Arctic ice cover to decrease: since the 1980s in the area of the Northern Sea Route, the decrease has amounted to 5–7 times. In the south of the European part of Russia in summer, against the background of rapid growth of average temperatures, moisture availability is decreasing and the risk of drought is increasing [10]. Based on modern scientific calculations using three-dimensional models of atmospheric and oceanic circulation, the main climate-influencing factor affecting trends in hydrometeorological parameters is the significant increase in thermodynamically active gases, particularly CO2, in the atmosphere [11]. To accurately predict changes in the Earth’s climate, it is essential to develop scenarios of variations in gas composition, considering both human-induced and natural factors. This includes projecting changes in carbon dioxide, methane, and other greenhouse gases. Therefore, both regular measurements of the content of these gases in the atmosphere and studies of their natural and anthropogenic sources and effluents are necessary to build reliable models of their circulation in nature [12]. The available model estimates of carbon emissions and stocks in the boreal zone require constant refinement, due to forest fires, which result in the loss of a significant amount of carbon, the construction of models only on a single sample of data, without annual repetition, the relatively young age of soils formed on glacial deposits, as well as the heterogeneity of topography [13,14,15]. Thus, the updating of data on stocks and emissions of climate-active gases is a necessary tool for improving existing models of carbon balance in the boreal zone [8].
In order to solve the tasks of monitoring of climatically active gases in Russia, an initiative has been launched to create a network of carbon monitoring site. The main task of carbon monitoring site [16], is to develop technologies and methods for determining the fluxes of climatically active gases, the main focus here is on studying the processes of sequestration and deposition of greenhouse gases by different types of natural environments and ecosystems [17,18]. Saint-Petersburg state University together with Voeikov Main Geophysical Observatory, with the support of the Government of the Leningrad Region, developed a project of the united carbon monitoring site “Ladoga”, aimed at studying the potential of greenhouse gas uptake by the ecosystem of the southern taiga, characteristic of the North-West of Russia. Globally, wetlands accumulate one-third of soil organic matter and contribute up to 31% of annual CH4 emissions [12,19]. The cold temperate humid zone, which is distributed in the east of Europe (Scandinavia, Russia) is the most active zone in terms of carbon stocks, accumulating up to 208 tC/ha, the largest carbon store after permafrost-affected soils, which contain up to 1173 tC/ha [20]. The territory of North-West Russia is characterized by the largest increase in average annual temperature in Russia, which may lead to transformation of ecosystems and soil organic matter, which will result in increased emission of climate-active gases [10]. A characteristic feature of Northwest Russia is a long history of farming, dating back several centuries [21]. The Ladoga carbon monitoring site contains former agricultural territories that were removed from agricultural use about 40 years ago and are affected by self-overgrowth [22]. The area of fallow land requires detailed study, as there is high uncertainty in estimating the emission of climate-active gases from areas that were used for agriculture. Annually, due to human activities in agriculture, around 17 billion tons of CO2-equivalent are released into the atmosphere, accounting for approximately 31% of all human-induced greenhouse gas emissions. In addition to this, agriculture contributes significantly to soil and water pollution as well as impacting the planet’s climate through chemical use. At present in Russia from 30 to 40 million hectares of arable land, which is converted into fallow land and transformed under the influence of natural and anthropogenic processes of soil formation, forest overgrowth, sodding, grass sowing, waterlogging, etc., is taken out of circulation and not used [22]. The territory of North-West Russia (Leningrad, Pskov and Novgorod regions) is a region with a direct connection to the history of surface development in glacial and post-glacial times. As a result, the Russian Plain’s territory has maintained a range of landforms and glacial sediments that have been minimally altered by weathering. This factor contributes to the diversity of soil cover and influences agricultural development in the northern regions of Russia [21,22]. Data on climate-sensitive gas emissions will help to refine general estimates of the contribution of fallow lands to carbon storage [23]. Soils formed in relative proximity to large cities are subjected to significant anthropogenic impact due to the emission of climate-active gases as a result of fossil fuel combustion [24]. With the increasing rate of urbanization, soils near large cities can become carbon sinks, carbon sources, and contribute significantly to climate change on the planet, so the study and identification of soils capable of more efficient and long-term carbon sequestration is an urgent task aimed at mitigating climate change [25]. To the date, knowledge on climate-active gas emissions from areas of different types of use near large cities is very limited due to the high level of heterogeneity of soil formation conditions and their change as a result of anthropogenic use [26]. St. Petersburg and the Leningrad Region can be considered as a united ecological and climatic center for interdisciplinary research in the field of carbon neutrality and sustainable development, including a comprehensive study of sources and sinks of climate-active gases and analyzing the potential for the development of carbon farms—a new type of sequestration carbon industry enterprises—in the study area. The implementation of carbon monitoring site and farms at the scale of the Russian Federation is expected to support the advancement of carbon farming. This sustainable business model offers economic advantages through the implementation of enhanced land management practices, which promote carbon sequestration in biomass, organic matter and soils. These practices aim to increase carbon sequestration while decreasing carbon emissions into the atmosphere based on ecological principles that are beneficial for biodiversity and natural capital as a whole. The aim of the work is to study the fluxes of carbon dioxide and methane from soils formed in different types of landscapes of the Ladoga monitoring site.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. The Study Area

The territory of the Ladoga carbon monitoring site is located in the southern part of the Vsevolozhsky District of the Leningrad Region (Figure 1). According to soil-geographical zoning [27], the study area belongs to the southern part of the Vyborgsky-Priozersky district of entic podzol soils.
The relief of the upland is eskers. In the central part of the upland the eskers form a hilly esker plateau. In the border part, the upland is often replaced by a stepped abrasion ledge. Further the relief is changed by waterlogged sandy terraces and plains. The majority of the area consists of flat, marshy terrains. There is a substantial variation in altitude, ranging from 32.5 to 77.5 m above sea level. Soil-forming rocks are presented by medium-grained loamy sands and sands, with thin interlayers of loamy material and fluvioglacial sands and loamy sands. Eskers landscapes are well drained (except for closed lakes of thermokarst origin), on well-warmed slopes there is a moisture deficit in summer. Plain landscapes are waterlogged by eutrophic type. The study site is located in the southern taiga zone. The flat rocky slopes and flat relief areas in the inter-kame depressions were previously used for agriculture. The forests here are secondary, post-agricultural, post-felling, lightened-deciduous with a significant admixture of non-moral and synanthropic species. The study area has the following climatic characteristics: temperate-cool climate with frequent change of marine and continental features, average annual temperature is +4.5 °C, average annual precipitation is 550–800 mm, more than half of days with precipitation, snow cover thickness exceeds 50 cm. The excess of precipitation over evaporation causes leaching type of water regime and development of podzol formation process on sandy materials and waterlogging conditions in relief depressions.

2.2. Strategy of Measurements

An experiment to estimate methane (CH4) and carbon dioxide (CO2) fluxes from the soil surface (vegetation was not removed) using a portable camera was conducted at the proposed Ladoga monitoring site. Measurements were taken on 9 November 2023 between ~9.00 and ~12.00 UTC. This study can be regarded as a so-called “reconnaissance study”, necessary for optimal planning of a long-term experiment involving installation of stationary camera systems at the Ladoga carbon monitoring site. For this purpose, we conducted a one-day campaign to measure CO2 and CH4 fluxes using a portable camera for a number of the most promising measurement sites. Camera measurements of climatically active gas emissions were conducted at 8 monitoring sites (Figure 2).
A description of the sites is provided in Table 1.
For sites № 1, 3, 4, 5, 6 two flux measurements were taken at dispersed, representative points on the site. One measurement was taken for № 7, 2, and 8. The absence of additional (second) measurements at sites № 7, 2, and 8 is due to technical problems encountered during field measurements. Measurements at the site were made during cloudy weather, with light winds (1 m/s) of southerly directions. No precipitation was observed. The air temperature and atmospheric pressure during the period of field measurements varied from 5.7 °C (09 UTC) to 5.9 °C (12 UTC) and from 1007.7 hPa (09 UTC) to 1008.1 hPa (12 UTC), respectively.

2.3. Ecosystem Carbon Flux Measurement

Manual chamber method. The chamber was placed on the soil, after which the concentration of CO2, CH4 and H2O in the mobile chamber was recorded. In the course of measurements, the air in the chamber and the gas analyzer circulated in a closed cycle—from the chamber to the gas analyzer, then back from the gas analyzer to the chamber. The closed loop is an idealized approximation for our case, since it is not possible to completely avoid air exchange with the atmosphere during mobile measurements with this design of the portable chamber (without digging into the soil). In order to ensure more uniform air mixing inside the chamber, the return air outlet from the gas analyzer was made through a perforated teflon tube running along the perimeter of the chamber. The total volume of the system, including the internal volumes of the gas analyzers in this arrangement was V = 7950 mL = 0.00795 m3. The inner diameter of the chamber was d = 0.28 m. During the chamber measurements we used a portable gas analyzer GLA131-GGA (ABB, Brampton, ON, Canada) to record concentrations of CO2, CH4 and H2O in the air. Random uncertainty of measured values of gas concentrations (1σ), for accumulation time of 1 s and 10 s is: for CH₄: 0.9 ppb and 0.3 ppb; for CO₂ 0.35 ppm and 0.12 ppm; for H₂O 200 ppm and 60 ppm. Experience with camera-based flux observations shows that, for example, for CO2, 60–120 s of closed-camera measurements are usually sufficient. Longer recording times may be required to estimate the flux from soil of other small gas constituents. The specified duration of chamber measurements prevents a significant increase in CO2 concentration in the chamber at typical rates of change such as 0.5 ppmv/s. It has been shown that the dead zone duration (equilibration processes in the chamber, this period is not used in flux estimation) can vary from about 10 to 60 s [29].
The fluxes of FCO2 and FCH4 were defined as the change in concentration Δq over the chamber measurement time Δt:
F = V · Δq / (Δt · S)
where q—concentration of target gas in dry air in kg/m3; t—time in seconds; V—total volume of the system in m3; S—inner square of the chamber in m2.
When preparing for chamber measurements at the Ladoga carbon monitoring site and determining CO2 and CH4 fluxes, we utilized contemporary techniques for chamber measurements as described in the “Theory of Soil Gas Flux Measurement” section on the LI-COR website [29].

2.4. Policy Recommendation

The establishment of the “Ladoga” carbon monitoring site in the Leningrad Region is a long-term project of priority importance for climate and environmental security of the region, prepared by Saint Petersburg State University and Voeikov Main Geophysical Observatory with the assistance of the Government of the Leningrad Region. This project aims to research and assess the sequestration carbon potential of Leningrad Region ecosystems, harmonized with international regulations. This could lead to determining the carbon emissions produced by businesses, helping them reduce financial strain related to implementing a cross-border carbon tax. Russia’s boreal forest plays a crucial role in carbon sequestration because a significant amount of carbon is stored in biomass and soil. To reduce carbon emissions in Russia’s boreal forest, it is recommended to implement the following policy measures:
  • Implement strict regulations and monitoring systems to prevent illegal logging and ensure sustainable forest management practices.
  • Invest in research and technology to improve forest inventory methods, such as remote sensing of forest inventories, to accurately estimate the amount, distribution, and uncertainty of carbon sequestration in the boreal forest.
  • Promote afforestation and reforestation projects in degraded areas of the boreal forest to increase carbon sequestration capacity.
  • Encourage the conservation and restoration of peatlands in the boreal forest, as they are significant carbon sinks.

3. Results and Discussion

The studied area of the “Ladoga” carbon monitoring site is characterized by a large set of biotopes, this is due to the variety of different landforms, as well as former agriculture activities. Most of the studied soil are characterized by carbon dioxide emission and methane absorption, while both carbon dioxide and methane emission occur in soil of wetlands (Figure 3, Table 2).
The values of FCO2 and FCH4 and FCO2-C and FCH4-C fluxes obtained during the field experiment are supported by the literature data published in [30,31]. The boreal belt is of the greatest importance for the global carbon balance, as the greatest amount of carbon in soils is stored here [32]. It was found that the highest level of carbon dioxide emission is observed in the soils of land which is not used for agriculture (4160 gCO2/(m2*year)). According to the study conducted in subtropics in China [33], it was found that the highest emission corresponds to soils formed under forests—533 gCO2/(m2*year), while the maximum was reached in paddy soils—901 gCO2/(m2*year). The results we obtained from natural soils are much higher than in forest soils of subtropical China, this may be due to the formation of a thick upper organomineral horizon of soils in humid conditions, in which active processes of humification and mineralization of organic carbon occur [34]. However, our values are confirmed by the study of Yi et al. [35], which measured CO2 emission from undisturbed soils of Dinghushan Biosphere Reserve, subtropical China, and found that depending on the type of forest ecosystems (evergreen, coniferous and broad-leaved mixed forest) and humidity, there was a significant increase in FCO2 emission, up to 4129, 3710 and 3761 gCO2/(m2*year), respectively. Relatively low carbon dioxide emission is observed from the soils of former agriculture land (from 1310 to 2880 gCO2/(m2*year)). This is due to the qualitative composition of soil organic matter of fallow lands, which has a relatively high level of stabilization compared to the organic matter of natural soils. With the transition of soils to fallow state, in the first 30–40 years the formation of aromatic structural fragments in humic acids is noted, it is connected with the change of plant communities, increase of biodiversity and changes in the composition and quality of humification precursors. Humic acids of natural soils is characterized by the predominance of aliphatic structural fragments, it is less mature and can be subjected to microbial degradation [36]. This is confirmed by a study by Yuste et al. [37], which found that CO2 emission is influenced by the qualitative composition of organic matter, soil organic matter content, microbial population, and seasonal variations in temperature and precipitation. Among the soils of former agriculture lands, we can note the highest carbon dioxide emission from former soils densely covered with forest litter (2880 gCO2/(m2*year)), in areas dominated by grass vegetation, the values of carbon dioxide emission fluxes were relatively low (1310 gCO2/(m2*year)). The obtained data are confirmed by Lou et al. [38], in the studied arable soils in the subtropics of China, the emission level varied from 1410 to 2840 gCO2/(m2*year) depending on the composition of soil-forming rocks, the highest emission was observed on red soils formed on granite deposits and the lowest on soils on clay. Sushko [39], noted that the forest-steppe zone is characterized by the lowest CO2 emission for soils of former agricultural soils, the highest emission was observed in natural soils. The lowest emission level was observed in the soil of wetland (640 gCO2/(m2*year)), as active methane emission occurs here among all the studied soils. According to different studies on CO2 emission from agricultural soils, a high variability of results can be observed, which is related to climatic peculiarities, lithological composition of soil-forming rocks and to the types of agricultural products, but the level of CO2 emission from agricultural soils is on average lower than that of natural soils [40,41,42].
The boreal zone is one of the most vulnerable natural zones to climate change, due to the relatively high content of soil organic carbon and the annual increase in temperature [10]. According to Hicks Pries et al. [43], it was found that an increase in soil temperature by 4 °C, can lead to an increase in CO2 emission of 34–37%, in the framework of the experiment, in temperate zone soils, an increase in CO2 emission from 1100 to 1450 gC m−2 year−1 was observed. This is due to the transformation of decadal-aged light fraction of organic carbon in soil, organic matter that is not enclosed in aggregates or does not have a complex molecular structure determine the CO2 emission from soil [43]. Soils near major urban areas are likely to be more vulnerable to climate change due to the impact of urbanization on forested regions surrounding large cities, resulting in a soil carbon loss [44].
FCH4 fluxes from soils of wetlands ranged from 0.05 to 0.83 gCH4/(m2*year). This is due to the activity of anaerobic microorganisms under conditions of increased hydromorphism of the territory. All soils, except soil of wetlands, are sink of methane from the atmosphere. Wanyama et al. [45] found that forest soils act as a net sink for methane in African tropical forests, as well as agricultural soils used to grow tea and eucalyptus. The main factor affecting the uptake was the change of dry and wet periods, so during dry periods methane uptake increased and during wet periods methane uptake decreased. Anthropogenic impact on soil has a negative effect on methane uptake, it is associated with overcompaction, disturbance of hydrological regime, as well as tillage. Natural soils are greater methane sinks compared to anthropogenically transformed soils [46], which is also confirmed in our study. An important factor influencing carbon dioxide fluxes is the quality of wood and plant residues, so in a study by Gitarskiy et al. [47], it was found that soils of old-growth spruce forests have more active CO2 emissions compared to younger spruce forests. Therefore, studying the fluxes of climatically active gases in soil of former agricultural land, where successional change of plant communities is actively taking place, is most relevant for estimating the carbon balance of forest ecosystems. This was also established by Wang et al. [12], who monitored the emission of climate-active gases for many years in soils on the Tibetan plateau, where, as a result of the change of plant communities, as well as the change of vegetation and non-vegetation periods, the periods of net absorption and net emission were changed. Thus, during the vegetation period, all studied biotopes (mesophytic meadow, wet meadow, and bog) were CO2 sinks, and during the non-vegetation period they were CO2 sources. In the works of Kurganova et al. [48,49] it found that components of the carbon balance and ecosystem runoff potential are determined by weather conditions (temperature and precipitation) of the current and previous year of the study, as well as by the type of ecosystem, so that extreme droughts reduced the emission activity of summer CO2 fluxes by 44–47%.
The Ladoga carbon monitoring site is located in close proximity to one of the largest cities in Russia, which may also influence the level of climate-active gas emissions. Guo et al. [50], noted that urbanization and population increase leads to additional carbon dioxide emissions. The area adjacent to large cities is an important element of the global carbon cycle, which can act as both a source and sink of carbon. Current study confirms the results of Guo et al. [50], wetlands are less of a source of carbon dioxide, while they can even act as a sink.

4. Conclusions

As a result of a study of climate-active gas emissions from soils at the Ladoga carbon monitoring site, it was found that all soils were a source of FCO2 during the study period. Former agriculture soils showed relatively low level of FCO2 emission compared to soils which are not used for agriculture, the lowest level of FCO2 emission was observed in soils of wetlands. The obtained values of FCO2 emission from soils of different types of use show the importance of continuing measurements of FCO2 fluxes from soils located near a large urbanized zone for the purpose of further monitoring of climate-active gases under the conditions of predicted climate change. According to the emission of FCH4 from former agriculture soils and soils which are not in use for agriculture it was observed that the soils were net sinks, whereas soils developing in wetlands were a source of FCH4. Agricultural use of soils has a key impact on soil uptake of methane from the atmosphere, which is reflected in a decrease in methane uptake, and these spatial changes are associated with soil transformation as a result of land self-overgrowth. This study provides an initial assessment of climate-active gas emissions from soils of different types of use, and is necessary for a better understanding of how soil transformation in close proximity to a large urbanized area will affect the carbon balance in an urbanized ecosystem. The data obtained make an important contribution to the monitoring of soils at different stages of successional changes of plant communities as a result of transition to fallow state and can be used for comparison and parameterization of carbon balance models to obtain reliable predictions of carbon emission and sequestration by soils of forest, fallow and wetlands ecosystems in the boreal belt of the Earth.

Author Contributions

E.A., V.P. and M.M. conceptualization, E.A. funding and writing, V.P., T.N. and M.M. expedition with fieldwork; E.A., V.P. and M.M. wrote the paper, V.I., N.P. and M.M. analysis of carbon flux. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by the project № 101662710 (GZ_MDF_2023-1) “From carbon polygon to carbon regulation: potential and ways of development of sequestration carbon industry on the territory of the Leningrad Region and St. Petersburg”.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data are contained within the article.

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by scientific equipment of Voeikov Main Geophysical Observatory.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Hodnebrog, Ø.; Aamaas, B.; Fuglestvedt, J.S.; Marston, G.; Myhre, G.; Nielsen, C.J.; Sandstad, M.; Shine, K.P.; Wallington, T.J. Updated Global Warming Potentials and Radiative Efficiencies of Halocarbons and other Weak Atmospheric Absorbers. Rev. Geophys. 2020, 58, e2019RG000691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. WMO. WMO Greenhouse Gas Bulletin; WMO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2021; p. 10. [Google Scholar]
  3. Sun, Y.; Yin, H.; Cheng, Y.; Zhang, Q.; Zheng, B.; Notholt, J.; Lu, X.; Liu, C.; Tian, Y.; Liu, J. Quantifying variability, source, and transport of CO in the urban areas over the Himalayas and Tibetan Plateau. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 2021, 21, 9201–9222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. National Action Plan of the First Phase of Adaptation to Climate Change for the Period Until 2022. Available online: http://static.government.ru/media/files/OTrFMr1Z1sORh5NIx4gLUsdgGHyWIAqy.pdf (accessed on 1 February 2024).
  5. Bradshaw, C.J.A.; Warkentin, I.G.; Sodhi, N.S. Urgent preservation of boreal carbon stocks and biodiversity. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2009, 24, 541–548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Pan, Y.; Birdsey, R.A.; Fang, J.; Houghton, R.; Kauppi, P.E.; Kurz, W.A.; Phillips, O.L.; Shvidenko, A.; Lewis, S.L.; Canadell, J.G.; et al. A Large and Persistent Carbon Sink in the World’s Forests. Science 2011, 333, 988–993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Bonan, G.B. Forests and Climate Change: Forcings, Feedbacks, and the Climate Benefits of Forests. Science 2008, 320, 1444–1449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Bradshaw, C.J.A.; Warkentin, I.G. Global estimates of boreal forest carbon stocks and flux. Glob. Planet. Change 2015, 128, 24–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Kattsov, V.M. Report on Climate Risks on the Territory of the Russian Federation. Federal Service for Hydrometeorology and Environmental Monitoring (Roshydromet); Climate Center of Roshydromet: St. Petersburg, FL, USA, 2017; Available online: http://cc.voeikovmgo.ru/images/dokumenty/2017/riski.pdf (accessed on 1 February 2024).
  10. Roshydromet. Report on Climate Peculiarities on the Territory of the Russian Federation for 2022; Roshydromet: Moscow, Russia, 2022; p. 109. [Google Scholar]
  11. IPCC. Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; IPCC: Cambridge, UK, 2021; p. 2391. [Google Scholar]
  12. Wang, H.; Yu, L.; Chen, L.; Zhang, Z.; Li, X.; Liang, N.; Peng, C.; He, J.-S. Carbon fluxes and soil carbon dynamics along a gradient of biogeomorphic succession in alpine wetlands of Tibetan Plateau. Fundam. Res. 2023, 3, 151–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Sanborn, P.; Lamontagne, L.; Hendershot, W. Podzolic soils of Canada: Genesis, distribution, and classification. Can. J. Soil Sci. 2011, 91, 843–880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Häkkinen, M.; Heikkinen, J.; Mäkipää, R. Soil carbon stock increases in the organic layer of boreal middle-aged stands. Biogeosciences 2011, 8, 1279–1289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Veraverbeke, S.; Delcourt, C.J.F.; Kukavskaya, E.; Mack, M.; Walker, X.; Hessilt, T.; Rogers, B.; Scholten, R.C. Direct and longer-term carbon emissions from arctic-boreal fires: A short review of recent advances. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sci. Health 2021, 23, 100277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Abakumov, E.; Polyakov, V. Carbon Polygons and Carbon Offsets: Current State, Key Challenges and Pedological Aspects. Agronomy 2021, 11, 2013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Ivanov, A.L.; Savin, I.Y.; Stolbovoy, V.S.; Dukhanin, Y.A.; Kozlov, D.N. Methodological approaches to the formation of a unified national system of monitoring and accounting of carbon balance and greenhouse gas emissions on lands of the agricultural fund of the Russian Federation. Dokuchaev Soil Bull. 2021, 108, 175–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Abakumov, E.V.; Polyakov, V.I.; Chukov, S.N. Approaches and Methods for Studying Soil Organic Matter in the Carbon Polygons of Russia (Review). Eurasian Soil Sci. 2022, 55, 849–860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Saunois, M.; Stavert, A.R.; Poulter, B.; Bousquet, P.; Canadell, J.G.; Jackson, R.B.; Raymond, P.A.; Dlugokencky, E.J.; Houweling, S.; Patra, P.K.; et al. The Global Methane Budget 2000–2017. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 2020, 12, 1561–1623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. FAO. Measuring and Modelling Soil Carbon Stocks and Stock Changes in Livestock Production Systems–A Scoping Analysis for the LEAP Work Stream on Soil Carbon Stock Changes; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2019; p. 84. [Google Scholar]
  21. Lyuri, D.I.; Nekrich, A.S.; Karelin, D.V. Cropland dynamics in Russia in 1990–2015 and soil emission of carbon dioxide. Vestn. Mosk. Univ. Seriya 5 Geogr. 2018, 3, 70–76. [Google Scholar]
  22. Kalinina, O.; Cherkinsky, A.; Chertov, O.; Goryachkin, S.; Kurganova, I.; Lopes de Gerenyu, V.; Lyuri, D.; Kuzyakov, Y.; Giani, L. Post-agricultural restoration: Implications for dynamics of soil organic matter pools. CATENA 2019, 181, 104096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Bobrenko, I.; Goman, N.; Nezhevlyak, O.; Bobrenko, E.; Kormin, V. Investigation of the intensity of carbon dioxide emissions by steppe soil when introducing fallow lands into circulation. E3S Web Conf. 2023, 413, 01004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Upadhyay, S.; Raghubanshi, A.S. Chapter 16—Determinants of soil carbon dynamics in urban ecosystems. In Urban Ecology; Verma, P., Singh, P., Singh, R., Raghubanshi, A.S., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2020; pp. 299–314. [Google Scholar]
  25. Tong, S.; Soskolne, C.L. Global Environmental Change and Population Health: Progress and Challenges. EcoHealth 2007, 4, 352–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Gómez-Baggethun, E.; Barton, D.N. Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning. Ecol. Econ. 2013, 86, 235–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Gagarina, E.I.; Matinyan, N.N.; Schastnaya, L.S.; Kasatkina, G.A. Soils and Soil Cover in Northwest Russia; Saint-Petersburg State University: Saint-Petersburg, Russia, 1995. [Google Scholar]
  28. WRB. IUSS Working Group WRB World Reference Base for Soil Resources 2014, Update 2015; WRB: Rome, Italy, 2015; p. 195. [Google Scholar]
  29. Li-Core. Soil Gas Flux Measurement Theory. Available online: https://www.licor.com/env/support/Smart-Chamber/topics/the-measurement-cycle.html#Soilgasfluxmeasurementtheory (accessed on 15 February 2024).
  30. Liu, L.; Estiarte, M.; Peñuelas, J. Soil moisture as the key factor of atmospheric CH4 uptake in forest soils under environmental change. Geoderma 2019, 355, 113920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Barrena, I.; Menéndez, S.; Duñabeitia, M.; Merino, P.; Florian Stange, C.; Spott, O.; González-Murua, C.; Estavillo, J.M. Greenhouse gas fluxes (CO2, N2O and CH4) from forest soils in the Basque Country: Comparison of different tree species and growth stages. For. Ecol. Manag. 2013, 310, 600–611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Kudeyarov, V.N. Soil respiration and carbon sequestration. Eurasian Soil Sci. 2023, 9, 1011–1022. [Google Scholar]
  33. Iqbal, J.; Ronggui, H.; Lijun, D.; Lan, L.; Shan, L.; Tao, C.; Leilei, R. Differences in soil CO2 flux between different land use types in mid-subtropical China. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2008, 40, 2324–2333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Liu, H.; Zhao, P.; Lu, P.; Wang, Y.-S.; Lin, Y.-B.; Rao, X.-Q. Greenhouse gas fluxes from soils of different land-use types in a hilly area of South China. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2008, 124, 125–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Yi, Z.; Fu, S.; Yi, W.; Zhou, G.; Mo, J.; Zhang, D.; Ding, M.; Wang, X.; Zhou, L. Partitioning soil respiration of subtropical forests with different successional stages in south China. For. Ecol. Manag. 2007, 243, 178–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Polyakov, V.; Abakumov, E.; Nizamutdinov, T.; Shevchenko, E.; Makarova, M. Estimation of Carbon Stocks and Stabilization Rates of Organic Matter in Soils of the «Ladoga» Carbon Monitoring Site. Agronomy 2023, 13, 807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Curiel Yuste, J.; Janssens, I.A.; Carrara, A.; Ceulemans, R. Annual Q10 of soil respiration reflects plant phenological patterns as well as temperature sensitivity. Glob. Change Biol. 2004, 10, 161–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Lou, Y.; Li, Z.; Zhang, T.; Liang, Y. CO2 emissions from subtropical arable soils of China. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2004, 36, 1835–1842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Sushko, S.V.; Ananyeva, N.D.; Ivashchenko, K.V.; Kudeyarov, V.N. Soil CO2 Emission, Microbial Biomass, and Basal Respiration of Chernozems under Different Land Uses. Eurasian Soil Sci. 2019, 52, 1091–1100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Buyanovsky, G.A.; Wagner, G.H. Soil respiration and carbon dynamics in parallel native and cultivated ecosystems. Adv. Soil Sci. 1995, 16, 209–219. [Google Scholar]
  41. Hui, D.; Luo, Y. Evaluation of soil CO2 production and transport in Duke Forest using a process-based modeling approach. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 2004, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Adolfo Campos, C. Response of soil surface CO2–C flux to land use changes in a tropical cloud forest (Mexico). For. Ecol. Manag. 2006, 234, 305–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Hicks Pries, C.E.; Castanha, C.; Porras, R.C.; Torn, M.S. The whole-soil carbon flux in response to warming. Science 2017, 355, 1420–1423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Pouyat, R.; Groffman, P.; Yesilonis, I.; Hernandez, L. Soil carbon pools and fluxes in urban ecosystems. Environ. Pollut. 2002, 116, S107–S118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Wanyama, I.; Pelster, D.E.; Butterbach-Bahl, K.; Verchot, L.V.; Martius, C.; Rufino, M.C. Soil carbon dioxide and methane fluxes from forests and other land use types in an African tropical montane region. Biogeochemistry 2019, 143, 171–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Owuor, S.O.; Butterbach-Bahl, K.; Guzha, A.C.; Jacobs, S.; Merbold, L.; Rufino, M.C.; Pelster, D.E.; Díaz-Pinés, E.; Breuer, L. Conversion of natural forest results in a significant degradation of soil hydraulic properties in the highlands of Kenya. Soil Tillage Res. 2018, 176, 36–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Gitarskiy, M.L.; Zamolodchikov, D.G.; Mukhin, V.A.; Diyarova, D.K.; Grabar, V.A.; Karelin, D.V.; Ivaschenko, A.I.; Marunich, A.S. Seasonal variations in carbon dioxide emissions during the fallen spruce trees decomposition in Southern Taiga. Russ. J. For. Sci. 2020, 3, 239–249. [Google Scholar]
  48. Kurganova, I.N.; Lopes de Gerenyu, V.O.; Myakshina, T.N.; Sapronov, D.V.; Savin, I.Y.; Shorohova, E.V. Carbon balance in forest ecosystems of southern part of Moscow region under a rising aridity of climate. Contemp. Probl. Ecol. 2017, 10, 748–760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Kurganova, I.N.; Lopes de Gerenyu, V.O.; Myakshina, T.N.; Sapronov, D.V.; Kudeyarov, V.N. CO2 emission from soils of various ecosystems of the Southern Taiga Zone: Data analysis of continuous 12-year monitoring. Dokl. Biol. Sci. 2011, 436, 56–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Guo, R.; Shao, G.; Wu, W.; Lin, R.; Peng, K.; Huang, X. Analyzing carbon source-sink nexus for green and sustainable transition at the local scale. Water-Energy Nexus 2023, 6, 6–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Atmosphere 15 00360 g001
Figure 1. The “Ladoga” carbon monitoring site. The soil ID correspond to Table 1.
Figure 1. The “Ladoga” carbon monitoring site. The soil ID correspond to Table 1.
Atmosphere 15 00360 g001
Atmosphere 15 00360 g002
Figure 2. Monitoring sites used to analyze emissions of climate-active gases.
Figure 2. Monitoring sites used to analyze emissions of climate-active gases.
Atmosphere 15 00360 g002
Atmosphere 15 00360 g003
Figure 3. Results of chamber measurements carried out on 11 September 2023 on the territory of the Ladoga monitoring site.
Figure 3. Results of chamber measurements carried out on 11 September 2023 on the territory of the Ladoga monitoring site.
Atmosphere 15 00360 g003
Table 1. Description of monitoring sites.
Table 1. Description of monitoring sites.
№The Description of Monitoring PlotPlant CommunitiesSoil Name *
1Former agricultural land. Flat relief. Densely covered with forest litter. Vegetation is represented by shrubs, young trees.Cereal birchPlaggic Stagnic Podzol (arenic) on water-glacial sediments
2Former agricultural land. Flat relief. Herbaceous cover, single trees present.Fallow fern-ruderal-grass meadowPlaggic Stagnic Podzol (arenic) on water-glacial sediments
3Former agricultural land. Flat relief. Densely covered with forest litter.Fallow fern-ruderal-grass meadowPlaggic Gleyic Podzol (arenic) on water-glacial sediments
4Land which are not used for agriculture. Esker slope. Represented by young trees, shrubs.Birch-pine forestPost-pyrogenic Umbrisol (arenic) on water-glacial sediments
5Wetland. Depression of relief. Grass cover, individual trees.Lowland moist-grass swampFolic Histosol on water-glacial sediments
6Former agricultural land. Flat relief. Densely covered with forest litter.Fallow fern-ruderal-grass meadowPlaggic Stagnic Podzol (arenic) on water-glacial sediments
7Land which are not used for agriculture. Top of the esker upland. Vegetation is represented by shrubs, young trees.Birch-pine forestEntic Stagnic Podzol on water-glacial sediments
8Wetland. Depression of relief. Grass cover, individual trees.Lowland moist-grass swampFolic Histosol on water-glacial sediments
* WRB FAO [28].
Table 2. Results of a field experiment on 11 September 2023 to determine fluxes using a soil chamber.
Table 2. Results of a field experiment on 11 September 2023 to determine fluxes using a soil chamber.
№Duration of the Period Used to Calculate FCH4 and FCO2, s (Gas Analyzer Counts: Start and End of Measurements, s)FCH4, CH4 g/(m2*Year);
FCH4-C, CH4-C g/(m2*Year)		FCO2, CO2 g/(m2*Year);
FCO2-C, CO2-C g/(m2*Year)
1170 (70–240 s)−0.61; −0.452090; 570
120 (350–470 s)−0.63; −0.471540; 420
2180 (1420–1600 s)−0.33; −0.251620; 440
3180 (2100–2280 s)−1.36; −1.022500; 690
160 (2430–2590 s)−1.69; −1.272870; 780
4120 (2880–3000 s)−1.26; −0.952160; 590
180 (3220–3400 s)−1.45; −1.081810; 490
5120 (3900–4020 s)0.53; 0.40640; 170
150 (4250–4400 s)0.05; 0.04860; 230
6110 (4760–4870 s)−0.89; −0.671510; 410
150 (4950–5100 s)−1.01; −0.751310; 360
7140 (5510–5650 s)−1.33; −0.994160; 1130
8150 (6250–6400 s)0.83; 0.62680; 180
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Abakumov, E.; Makarova, M.; Paramonova, N.; Ivakhov, V.; Nizamutdinov, T.; Polyakov, V. Carbon Fluxes from Soils of “Ladoga” Carbon Monitoring Site Leningrad Region, Russia. Atmosphere 2024, 15, 360. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15030360

AMA Style

Abakumov E, Makarova M, Paramonova N, Ivakhov V, Nizamutdinov T, Polyakov V. Carbon Fluxes from Soils of “Ladoga” Carbon Monitoring Site Leningrad Region, Russia. Atmosphere. 2024; 15(3):360. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15030360

Chicago/Turabian Style

Abakumov, Evgeny, Maria Makarova, Nina Paramonova, Viktor Ivakhov, Timur Nizamutdinov, and Vyacheslav Polyakov. 2024. "Carbon Fluxes from Soils of “Ladoga” Carbon Monitoring Site Leningrad Region, Russia" Atmosphere 15, no. 3: 360. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15030360

APA Style

Abakumov, E., Makarova, M., Paramonova, N., Ivakhov, V., Nizamutdinov, T., & Polyakov, V. (2024). Carbon Fluxes from Soils of “Ladoga” Carbon Monitoring Site Leningrad Region, Russia. Atmosphere, 15(3), 360. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15030360

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop