Cargando…
Quantifying ecosystem service trade‐offs for plantation forest management to benefit provisioning and regulating services
There is increasing interest worldwide regarding managing plantation forests in a manner that maintains or improves timber production, enhances ecosystem services, and promotes long‐term sustainability of forest resources. We selected the Gan River Basin, the largest catchment of Poyang Lake and a r...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5632617/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29043036 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.3286 |
Sumario: | There is increasing interest worldwide regarding managing plantation forests in a manner that maintains or improves timber production, enhances ecosystem services, and promotes long‐term sustainability of forest resources. We selected the Gan River Basin, the largest catchment of Poyang Lake and a region with a typical plantation distribution in South China, as the study region. We evaluated and mapped four important forest ecosystem services, including wood volume, carbon storage, water yield, and soil retention at a 30 × 30 m resolution, then quantified their trade‐offs and synergies at the county and subwatershed scales. We found that the wood volume and carbon storage services, as well as the soil retention and water yield, exhibited synergistic relationships. However, the carbon storage displayed a trade‐off relationship with the water yield. Additionally, we compared the beneficial spatial characteristics among dominant species in the study region. The results showed that the Chinese fir forest and the pine forest exhibited lower overall benefits than natural forests including the broad‐leaved forest and the bamboo forest. To propose a suitable management strategy for the study region, method of spatial cluster analysis was used based on the four eco‐services at the subwatershed scale. The basin was divided into four management groups instead of treating the region as a homogenous management region. Finally, we proposed more specific and diverse management strategies to optimize forest benefits throughout the entire region. |
---|