TY - JOUR
T1 - Restoration of afforested peatland
T2 - Immediate effects on aquatic carbon loss
AU - Gaffney, Paul P.J.
AU - Hancock, Mark H.
AU - Taggart, Mark A.
AU - Andersen, Roxane
N1 - © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
PY - 2020/6/30
Y1 - 2020/6/30
N2 - Peatland restoration is undertaken to bring back key peatland ecosystem services, including carbon storage. In the case of drained, afforested blanket peatlands, restoration through drain blocking and tree removal may impact upon aquatic carbon concentrations and export, which needs to be accounted for when considering the carbon benefits of restoration. This study investigated concentrations and export of aquatic carbon from a drained, afforested blanket bog catchment, where 12% of the catchment underwent drain blocking and conifer removal (termed ‘forest-to-bog’ restoration), and from two control catchments: one in open bog and one that remained afforested. Using a before-after-control-impact (BACI) design, we found no significant increases in concentrations or export of aquatic carbon (DOC, POC or DIC) in the first year following forest-to-bog restoration (i.e. across the whole post-restoration period). However, increased DOC concentrations were observed in the first summer (2015) post-restoration, and seasonally increased DOC export was noted during storm events in the autumn of the same year. The lack of significant effects of forest-to-bog restoration on aquatic carbon export may be a consequence of the small proportion of the catchment (12%) undergoing management. In terms of management, the removal of more of the forestry residues (i.e., brash) may help to mitigate effects on aquatic carbon, by removing a potential DOC and POC source. Restoring small areas at a time (≤12%) should result in minimal aquatic carbon export issues, in contexts similar to the current study.
AB - Peatland restoration is undertaken to bring back key peatland ecosystem services, including carbon storage. In the case of drained, afforested blanket peatlands, restoration through drain blocking and tree removal may impact upon aquatic carbon concentrations and export, which needs to be accounted for when considering the carbon benefits of restoration. This study investigated concentrations and export of aquatic carbon from a drained, afforested blanket bog catchment, where 12% of the catchment underwent drain blocking and conifer removal (termed ‘forest-to-bog’ restoration), and from two control catchments: one in open bog and one that remained afforested. Using a before-after-control-impact (BACI) design, we found no significant increases in concentrations or export of aquatic carbon (DOC, POC or DIC) in the first year following forest-to-bog restoration (i.e. across the whole post-restoration period). However, increased DOC concentrations were observed in the first summer (2015) post-restoration, and seasonally increased DOC export was noted during storm events in the autumn of the same year. The lack of significant effects of forest-to-bog restoration on aquatic carbon export may be a consequence of the small proportion of the catchment (12%) undergoing management. In terms of management, the removal of more of the forestry residues (i.e., brash) may help to mitigate effects on aquatic carbon, by removing a potential DOC and POC source. Restoring small areas at a time (≤12%) should result in minimal aquatic carbon export issues, in contexts similar to the current study.
KW - Drain blocking
KW - Dissolved organic carbon (DOC)
KW - Water quality
KW - Conifer harvesting
KW - Blanket bog
KW - Flow country
U2 - 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140594
DO - 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140594
M3 - Article
SN - 0048-9697
VL - 742
JO - Science of the Total Environment
JF - Science of the Total Environment
M1 - 140594
ER -