Analyzing Trade-Offs, Synergies, and Drivers among Timber Production, Carbon Sequestration, and Water Yield in Pinus elliotii Forests in Southeastern USA

被引:85
作者
Cademus, Ronald [1 ]
Escobedo, Francisco J. [2 ]
McLaughlin, Daniel [2 ]
Abd-Elrahman, Amr [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Florida, Sch Nat Resources & Environm, Gainesville, FL 32611 USA
[2] Univ Florida, Sch Forest Resources & Conservat, Gainesville, FL 32611 USA
[3] Univ Florida, Sch Forest Resources & Conservat, Geomat Program, Plant City, FL 33563 USA
来源
FORESTS | 2014年 / 5卷 / 06期
基金
美国食品与农业研究所;
关键词
ecosystem services and goods; ecosystem service interactions; forest management; Florida; forest inventory and analysis; MAPPING ECOSYSTEM SERVICES; VEGETATION CHANGES; CONSERVATION; BIODIVERSITY; GOODS; AFFORESTATION; PLANTATIONS; MANAGEMENT;
D O I
10.3390/f5061409
中图分类号
S7 [林业];
学科分类号
0829 ; 0907 ;
摘要
Managing Pinus elliotii forests for timber production and/or carbon sequestration is a common management objective, but can negatively affect water yield due to high losses from evapotranspiration. Thus, understanding the trade-offs and potential synergies among multiple ecosystem goods services, as well as the drivers influencing these interactions, can help identify effective forest management practices. We used available data from 377 permanent plots from the USDA Forest Service Forest Inventory and Analysis Program for 2002-2011, and a forest water yield model to quantify provision levels and spatial distribution and patterns of carbon sequestration, timber volume and water yield for Pinus elliotii ecosystems in North Florida, USA. A ranking-classification framework and statistical analyses were used to better understand the interactions among ecosystem services and the effect of biophysical drivers on ecosystem service bundles. Results indicate that increased biomass reduced water yield but this trade-off varied across space. Specific synergies, or acceptable provision levels, among carbon sequestration, timber volume and water yield were identified and mapped. Additionally, stand age, silvicultural treatment, and site quality significantly affected the provision level of, and interactions among, the three ecosystem goods and services. The framework developed in this study can be used to assess, map, and manage subtropical forests for optimal provision of ecosystem services.
引用
收藏
页码:1409 / 1431
页数:23
相关论文
共 52 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], RMRSGTR245 USDA FOR
  • [2] Conserving biodiversity and ecosystem services
    Balvanera, P
    Daily, GC
    Ehrlich, PR
    Ricketts, TH
    Bailey, SA
    Kark, S
    Kremen, C
    Pereira, H
    [J]. SCIENCE, 2001, 291 (5511) : 2047 - 2047
  • [3] Economic evaluation of ecosystem goods and services under different landscape management scenarios
    Baral, Himlal
    Keenan, Rodney J.
    Sharma, Sunil K.
    Stork, Nigel E.
    Kasel, Sabine
    [J]. LAND USE POLICY, 2014, 39 : 54 - 64
  • [4] Spatial assessment of ecosystem goods and services in complex production landscapes: A case study from south-eastern Australia
    Baral, Himlal
    Keenan, Rodney J.
    Fox, Julian C.
    Stork, Nigel E.
    Kasel, Sabine
    [J]. ECOLOGICAL COMPLEXITY, 2013, 13 : 35 - 45
  • [5] Understanding relationships among multiple ecosystem services
    Bennett, Elena M.
    Peterson, Garry D.
    Gordon, Line J.
    [J]. ECOLOGY LETTERS, 2009, 12 (12) : 1394 - 1404
  • [6] A REVIEW OF CATCHMENT EXPERIMENTS TO DETERMINE THE EFFECT OF VEGETATION CHANGES ON WATER YIELD AND EVAPO-TRANSPIRATION
    BOSCH, JM
    HEWLETT, JD
    [J]. JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGY, 1982, 55 (1-4) : 3 - 23
  • [7] The nature and value of ecosystem services: An overview highlighting hydrologic services
    Brauman, Kate A.
    Daily, Gretchen C.
    Duarte, T. Kaeo
    Mooney, Harold A.
    [J]. ANNUAL REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENT AND RESOURCES, 2007, 32 : 67 - 98
  • [8] Evaluation of methods for classifying epidemiological data on choropleth maps in series
    Brewer, CA
    Pickle, L
    [J]. ANNALS OF THE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN GEOGRAPHERS, 2002, 92 (04) : 662 - 681
  • [9] Brown M. J., 2007, RESOUR B USDA FOR SE
  • [10] Carr M.H., 2008, SMART LAND USE ANAL