Carbon Sequestration in Mango Orchards in Seasonally Dry Tropical Savanna Climate under Different Management

ABSTRACT

This study assessed the carbon (C) sequestration potential of 35-year-old mango orchards under different management. Potential C-sequestered was estimated in various C pools, viz., above-ground biomass (AGB), below-ground biomass (BGB), weed, litter, and soil organic carbon (SOC). Mango trees under conservation horticultural practices (CHP) had the highest values of AGB and BGB, 382.13 kilogram (kg) tree⁻¹ and 115.25 kg tree⁻¹, respectively, whereas AGB and BGB were lowest in mango trees with weed cover and intensive management (WCIM) (328.69 kg tree⁻¹ and 99.13 kg tree⁻¹, respectively) and intermediate in mango orchards with clean cultivation and intensive management (CCIM) (342.51 kg tree⁻¹ and 112.26 kg tree⁻¹, respectively). Mango orchards with CHP and WCIM expressively enhanced the soil C stock in the top 1 meter (m) of orchard soils. Compared to clean a cultivation vegetable field (CCVF), CHP and WCIM increased soil C sequestration by 15.2 tonnes per hectare (t ha⁻¹) and 12.9 t ha⁻¹, respectively. Soil C is the largest pool of C followed by AGB, BGB, and litter ≥ weed. Soil C had 2.54-, 2.75-, and 2.37-fold higher CCIM, WCIM, and CHP, respectively, than tree C. The highest total C content (107.63 t ha⁻¹) was found in CHP, followed by WCIM (100.05 t ha⁻¹), and the least was under CCIM (97.31 t ha⁻¹), suggesting that mango orchards with CHP offer promising potential for total C sequestration. Averaged across the three different management systems, the highest potential for C storage was observed to be 101.7 t ha⁻¹ for mango orchard, 1.68 fold higher than in vegetable systems.

KEYWORDS:

• Carbon sequestration
• carbon pools
• mango
• vegetable system
• management practices

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to ICAR-National Innovations on Climate Resilient Agriculture (NICRA) for financial support. The authors also thank the Director, ICAR-IIHR for providing support for this project.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).