Restoring coastal plants to improve global carbon storage: Reaping what we sow

72Citations
Citations of this article
296Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Long-term carbon capture and storage (CCS) is currently considered a viable strategy for mitigating rising levels of atmospheric CO2 and associated impacts of global climate change. Until recently, the significant below-ground CCS capacity of coastal vegetation such as seagrasses, salt marshes, and mangroves has largely gone unrecognized in models of global carbon transfer. However, this reservoir of natural, free, and sustainable carbon storage potential is increasingly jeopardized by alarming trends in coastal habitat loss, totalling 30-50% of global abundance over the last century alone. Human intervention to restore lost habitats is a potentially powerful solution to improve natural rates of global CCS, but data suggest this approach is unlikely to substantially improve long-term CCS unless current restoration efforts are increased to an industrial scale. Failure to do so raises the question of whether resources currently used for expensive and time-consuming restoration projects would be more wisely invested in arresting further habitat loss and encouraging natural recovery. © 2011 Irving et al.

Figures

  • Figure 1. Major carbon-storing habitats on tropical and temperate coasts. Degradation and loss of (A) seagrass meadows, (B) mangrove forests, and (C) salt marshes may release hundreds to thousands of years worth of stored carbon through exposure and breakdown of below-ground biomass, shown in (D) for seagrasses. Photo credits: Andrew Irving. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0018311.g001
  • Table 1. Summary of key data sources and values used in calculations of global historical CCS rates and future changes under different habitat recovery and restoration scenarios.
  • Figure 2. Historical and future carbon capture and storage rates (CCS) of coastal vegetation. (A) Extensive historical losses of seagrasses, mangroves, and salt marshes have reduced the CCS capacity of the coast. Points plotted represent the mean CCS for each habitat over time, and are bounded by lines of maximum and minimum rates of CCS published in the literature. Note that minimum rates for mangroves overlaps with the range of values for seagrass (depicted with purple shading). (B) Historical rates of CCS by seagrass are compared to rates under future scenarios of natural habitat recovery, as well as recovery combined with different intensities of restoration. Increasing restoration efforts to 100-times current levels will produce benefits to CCS that are similar to natural recovery alone. Rates of CCS following current trends in continued global seagrass decline are also plotted for reference. Data for calculating CCS rates were primarily sourced from [8,9,12,13,15,16,34] (also see Table 1). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0018311.g002

References Powered by Scopus

Human domination of Earth's ecosystems

7289Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The oceanic sink for anthropogenic CO<inf>2</inf>

3222Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Accelerating loss of seagrasses across the globe threatens coastal ecosystems

3120Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

The role of coastal plant communities for climate change mitigation and adaptation

1558Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Seagrass ecosystems as a globally significant carbon stock

1462Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Estimating Global "Blue Carbon" Emissions from Conversion and Degradation of Vegetated Coastal Ecosystems

1161Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Irving, A. D., Connell, S. D., & Russell, B. D. (2011). Restoring coastal plants to improve global carbon storage: Reaping what we sow. PLoS ONE, 6(3). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0018311

Readers over time

‘11‘12‘13‘14‘15‘16‘17‘18‘19‘20‘21‘22‘23‘24‘25015304560

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 121

59%

Researcher 61

30%

Professor / Associate Prof. 13

6%

Lecturer / Post doc 10

5%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Environmental Science 104

47%

Agricultural and Biological Sciences 99

45%

Earth and Planetary Sciences 14

6%

Social Sciences 5

2%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Mentions
News Mentions: 1

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0