Comparing aboveground carbon storage in planted and self-recruited former farmland reverting to forest in NE Ohio

Location

CELA & Mary Church Terrell Library, First Floor

Document Type

Poster - Open Access

Start Date

4-25-2025 12:00 PM

End Date

4-25-2025 2:00 PM

Abstract

Increasing carbon storage in ecosystems is an important approach to mitigating rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations and the subsequent effects of climate change. Both tree planting and natural reforestation are proposed approaches for enhancing above- and below-ground carbon storage. This study aims to evaluate afforestation as a means to increase carbon accumulation. In 2013, four species of trees were planted on one section of abandoned farmland owned by Oberlin College. Adjacent sections were left to naturally reseed from the surrounding forest. We follow up on Wolfe and Schiff’s 2017 baseline carbon storage assessment for this site, which did not find significant differences between planted and unplanted sections. In 2024, our team measured aboveground carbon storage, and a second team assessed soil carbon. Unfortunately, the sites sampled in 2017 had been recently mowed without prior notice, so for comparison, we added a nearby, naturally reseeding third site that was unmowed. We hypothesized that planting would have increased aboveground carbon storage compared to natural regeneration due to the planted trees being older and larger, but that mowing would have a stronger negative impact because it removed lots of biomass from the ecosystem. Our results show significantly more aboveground carbon stored in the unmowed site than the other two, demonstrating the negative impact of mowing on carbon storage. Two planted species are currently out-performing the native red maple; however, this trend is likely to change over time, underscoring the importance of long-term studies to determine the best ecosystem management decisions for climate change mitigation.

Keywords:

Ecology, Carbon sequestration, Succession

Notes

Presenters: Savannah Wright and Noah Hamaoui

Major

Biology
Environmental Studies

Project Mentor(s)

John Petersen, Environmental Studies and Biology

2025

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS
 
Apr 25th, 12:00 PM Apr 25th, 2:00 PM

Comparing aboveground carbon storage in planted and self-recruited former farmland reverting to forest in NE Ohio

CELA & Mary Church Terrell Library, First Floor

Increasing carbon storage in ecosystems is an important approach to mitigating rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations and the subsequent effects of climate change. Both tree planting and natural reforestation are proposed approaches for enhancing above- and below-ground carbon storage. This study aims to evaluate afforestation as a means to increase carbon accumulation. In 2013, four species of trees were planted on one section of abandoned farmland owned by Oberlin College. Adjacent sections were left to naturally reseed from the surrounding forest. We follow up on Wolfe and Schiff’s 2017 baseline carbon storage assessment for this site, which did not find significant differences between planted and unplanted sections. In 2024, our team measured aboveground carbon storage, and a second team assessed soil carbon. Unfortunately, the sites sampled in 2017 had been recently mowed without prior notice, so for comparison, we added a nearby, naturally reseeding third site that was unmowed. We hypothesized that planting would have increased aboveground carbon storage compared to natural regeneration due to the planted trees being older and larger, but that mowing would have a stronger negative impact because it removed lots of biomass from the ecosystem. Our results show significantly more aboveground carbon stored in the unmowed site than the other two, demonstrating the negative impact of mowing on carbon storage. Two planted species are currently out-performing the native red maple; however, this trend is likely to change over time, underscoring the importance of long-term studies to determine the best ecosystem management decisions for climate change mitigation.